"Tin- RE IS DULY THE FIGHT...”

An Analysis of tho Minsky Modol •

v

*4

A thosio tmbaitted in partial fulfillmentof tho requirements for tlio Bachelor of Artsdofrreo under tho Special Honors Program, ~

VJollosloy Collogo, Wcllosloy, Massachusetts.

Hillary D. RodhamPolitical Scicnco2 May, I969

t

l © 1969' Hillary D. Rodham]

S® hero I an, in tho middle way’, having had Verity years—Twenty years largely wasted, the years of I’entre deux guorresTrying to learn to .-use words, And every attemptIfi ft wholly new start, and a different kind of failureBecause one has only learnt to get the bettor of wordsFor the thing eno no longer has to say, or tho day in whichOne is no .longer disposed to say it. And so each ventureIs a new beginning, a raid on the InarticulateWith shabby equipment always deterioratingIn the general mss ef imprecision of feeling, ’*

; >

Undisciplined cquads of emotion. And what there is to conquerBy strength and submission, has already been discoveredOnce or twice, or several times, by non whom, one cannot hopeTo emulate—but there is no competition

—

There is only the fight to recover what has been lestAnd found and lost again and again : and now, under conditionsThat' seem unpropltlous . Bit perhaps neither gain nor lossFor us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business,

% ' * T,5 v Eliot, "East Cokor” ..'

‘

.^..Although 1 have no "loving wife*' to thank for keeping

tho eM'dron a*-*av while I wrote, I do havo nany friends and'

\

teachers who have contributed to tho process of thesis-writing*

And 1 thank them for their tiroless help and pnoourngeaiont* In

* regard to tho paper itself, there are three people who dosorv©

special appreciation: Mr. Alinsky for providing a topic, sharing

his time and offering r.o a^ob; Kiss /ilona E. Evans for her

thoughtful questioning and careful editing that clarified fuzr.y

thinking and tortured prose; and Jan Krigbaum for her spirited

%

intolloctual companionship and typewriter roncuo work.

f hdr

CHAPTER I. A

SAUL DAVID ALINSKY t All AMERICAN RADICAL

*#&*•»•», too economist referred

- • 1to Saul Minsky as "that rare specimen, the successful radical.” This

'

is on© of tho blander descriptions applied W Alinsky during a thirty-

year career in which epithets have been collocted more regularly than

paychecks. The epithets are not surprising as most people who deal with

Minsky need to categorise in order to handle him. It is far easier to*

cope .with a man if, .depending on ideological perspective, ho is olassl-’

fled an a "crackpot” than to grapple with the substantive Issues he pre-

eetntu, T~ or- B»uX All nolcv' Is fssrn than a man who has created a .particular

approach to community organising, he is the articulate proponent of what -

/

marry c©nsidor to be a dangerous vc o cl o /political philosophy. An under-

standing of tho "Minsky-type mothod" (i.e. his organizing method) as

well as the philosophy on which it is based must start with an under-

standing of the man himself.

Alinsky was born In a Chicago slum to Russian Jewish .immigrant

parents, and those early conditions of slum living arvi poverty in Chi-O'

capo established tho context of his ideas and mode of action. He traces

his identification with the poor back to a homo in the rear of a store

where his idea of luxury was using tho bathroom without a customer bang-2

'

".

-• ""

;

'

ing on the door, Chicago itself has also greatly influenced him:*

J'

• • .' f- ' -

. 4"" ” '-

: )V ' .;r:.

Where did I come from? Chicago. I can curse and hate the townbat let anyone else do it and they’re in for a battle # There I’vehad the happiest and the worst times of ay life. Every street has .

its personal joy and pain to me. On this street is the- church ofa Catholic Bishop who was a big part of ry lifer further down is

another church where the pastor too has meant a lot*- to mo; and - a -

couple milos away is a cemetery—well, skip it.. Many Chicago streets

are places of iy life and work. Things that happened here haverocked a lot of boats in a lot of cities. Nowadays I fly all over. *

the country in the course of iy work. But when those flaps go down;

over the Chicago slyline , I know I’m -home. 3 ' v

'

Although Alinsky calls Chicago his ’’city" , the place really rep-

resents to him the American Dream—in all its Aightmare and its gleiy*

He lived the Droam as he moved from the Chicago slums to California' then

back to attend the University of Chicago. Alinsky credits his developing

an active imagination, which is essential for a good organizer, to his‘•

majoring iri archaeology. An imagination focusing on Inca artifacts, how-4

ever, needs exposure to social problems before it can become useful in

community organizing. Exposure began for Alinsky when fco and othor stu-

dents collected food for the starving coal miners in southern Illinois •

who were rebelling against John L. Lewis and the United Mine Workors.

t

Lewis became a role model for Alinsly who learned about labor* s organ-

izational tactics from watching and working with Lewis during the early

years of the CIO. Alinsky soon becognized that one of the hardest jobs

of the leader is an imaginative one as he struggles to develop a rationale

for spontaneous action:

For instance, when the first ^sit-down strikes took place ^in

Flint, no one really planned them. They were clearly a violationof the law—trespassing, seizure- of private property. Labor leadersran for covor, refused to comment. But Lewis issued a pontifical

. statement, ’a nan’s right to a job transcends the right of privateproperty which sounded plausible.

4

After graduating from tho - University of Chicago, Alinsly re-

ceived a fellowship' in.tcriminblogy with a first assignment' to get a look

at crime from the inside of gangs. He attached himself to the Capone gang

, . attaining a perspective from which he viewed the gang as a huge quasi-

public utility serving tho people of Chicago. Alinsky* s eclectic: life

during the thirties, working with gangs, raising money for the Interna-

tional Brigade * r^Vfl ici** ng the plight of the Southern share cropper

,

fighting for public housing, reached a turning point in 193& "when he' ...

*.

* *

. t . .

_

"

was offered the job as head of probation and parole for the City of

Philadelphia. Security. Prestige. Money. Each of thoso inducements,T ..

' * _ ’ -

! . •' *

alone' has been enough to' turn many a lean and hungry agitator into -7*^

a .well-fed establishmentarian. Alinsky rojectod the offer and its •

triple threat for a caroor of organizing the poor to hoIp themselves.

His first target xene. was the Eack of the Yards area in Chicago;

the immediate impetus was his intense hatred of fascism:

...I went into 'Back of the Yards' in Chicago. This was UptonSinclair's 'Jungle.' This was not tho slum across the tracks*

.This was tho slum across the tracks f rorr^across the tracks. Also,this was the heart, infchicago, of all the native fascist move- V'*ments~the Coughlinites, the Silver Shirts, the Pelley movement..

.

I went in there to fight fascism. If you had asked me then whatmy profession was, I would have- told you I was a professional anti-fascist. 5

Alinsky* s anti-fascism, built around anti-authoritarianism, anti-raoial

superiority, anti-oppression, was the ideological justification for his

movo into organizing and the first social basis on which he began .con-

structing his theory of action. .

Workingin-Chic a go and other communities between 1933 and 19^6

Alinsky refined his methods and expanded his theory. Then in 19^»I

Alinsky' s first book, Reveille for Radicals , was published. Since Alinsky"

' V

is firstly an activist and secondly a theoretician,more than one-half•

the book is concerned with the tactics * of building "People's Organizations.

There are chapter discussions of "Native Leadership," "Community Traditions

and Organizations," "Conflict Tadtics," "Popular Education," and "Paych-. , - / .

__/

'

ological Observations on Mass Organizations." The book begins by asking

the question: What is a Radical? This is a basic question for Alinsky who

nroudlv +/* M-relf a radical... . «

—'S ti .

• ,* •

•

* * .. VT'*""',' • ' •

His;answer is prefacod by pages of Fourth-of-July rhetoric about"*

*- *

<

* , v•»

,

• ' t *

Americans! "They are a people creating a now bridge of mankind in between

the past of narrow nationalistic chauvinism and the horizon of a new man.-, 6 - -

..kind—a people of the world.” Although the book was written right afterk ' r

. .

World War XI, whioh deeply affected Alinsky, his belief ii^American de-

mocracy has deep historical roots— at’ least, as he . interprets history:

The American people were,in the beginning, Revolutionaries and" Tories.- The American People ever since habe been. Revolutionaries

and Tories. . .regardless of the labels oJythe past and present...The clash of Radicals, Conservatives, and Liberals which makes

up America’s political history opens the door to the most funda-mental question of What is America? How do the people of America,

feel?. There were and are a number -of Americans—few, to be sure-filled with doep feelings for people. They know that people are the _

stuff that makes up the dream of democracy.. These- few Were and are. the American Radicals and the only way we can understand the ^Amer-ican Radical is to understand what wo moan by this feeling for andwith the people^

.

- <

What Alinsky means by this "feeling for and with the people *1 is

simply how much one persot^oally cares about people unlike himself. Ho

illustrate s^he feeling by a series of examples in which/he poses questions

such as: So you are a white, native-born Protestant. Do you like people?

He then proceeds to demonstrate how, in spite of protestations, the Protea-/ '

.*

tant (or the Irish Catholic or the Jew or the Negro or the_Mexican) 'only

pays lip- service to the idea of equality. This -technique of confrontation

in Alinsky* s writing effectively involves most of his readers who will

recognize in themselves at least one of the characteristics he denounces.

Having confronted his readers with their hypocrisy, Alinsky defines the

t

American fedical as "...that unique person who actually believes what ho-

.

_

- •.

•—- . •

;says. . .to whomjiho common good is the greatest personal value. . .who gen-

uinely and completely belioves in mAnkind....’*

i :

Alihsky outlihos American history focusing^on non ho would call

"radical," confronting his readers again with tho "unique" way Americans

havo synthesized the alien roots of radicalism, Marxism, Utopian soc-, < «* *

,

ialisra, syndicalism, tho French Revolution,with their own conditions'

and experiences:„

'

Whore arc the American Radicals? They trerc with Patrick Honryirjthe Virgina Hall of Burgesses; they wore with Sordidams in Boston;they were with that peer of all American Radicals, Ton Pri.no,fromtho distribution of Common Sense through those dark days of theAmerican Rovolution. .

.

The American Radicals wore in thv colonies grimly forcing thoaddition of tho Bill of Rights to our Constitution. They stood at*.

N tho sido of Torn Jefferson inthe first big battle botwoen the Toriesof Hamilton snathe American

(

peoplc. They founded and fought in, the

7LocoJocos* .’They were. .inthe,''first -union strike irJ'jnorica and theyfought for the distribution of the western lands to the massos of

-people instead of the few... They were inthe shadows of tho under-ground railroad an^they openly rode in the sunlight with John Brownto Harpers Ferry... .They were with' Horace Mann fighting for the ex-tension of educational opportunities. . .They built the American Labormovomnnt ...

r

Many of their deeds are not nncjhever will be recorded in America's.

1

fishery . They were among the grimy men in the dust bowl, they sweatedwith 'the share croppers. They were at the side of,the Okies facingthe California vigilantes. They stood and stand before tho fury oflynching mobs. Thoy wore and are on the picket lines gazing unflinch-ingly at tho throatoning, flushed, angry faces of the police.

American Radicals are to be found wherever and whenever Amorlcamoves closer to the fulfillment of its democratic dream.* WheneverAmerica's hearts are breaking, these American Radicals v/oro andaare.America was bogun by its Radicals. *ffho hope and future of Americalies with its Radicals.

9

Words such as these coupled with his compelling personality enab3.od Alinsky

to hold a sidewalk seminar during tho 1968 Democratic Party Convention in

Chicago. He socratically gathered around him a group of- young domohstrators

on tho corner of Michigan and Bilbo on Monday night telling them that they *•

’ 10 .

'

were another generation of American Radicals.

Alinsky attempts to oncompass all those worthy of^iis description

"radical" Into an Ideological Weltanschauung :f

'.*

What does tho Radical wapt? Ho wants a world in which the worthof tho individual is recognized. . .a world basod on tho morality ofmankind...The Radical believes that all peoples should have a high :

.

standard of food, housing, and health...The Radical places human--*

right's far above property rights. Ho is for universal ,froo publiceducation and recognizes this as. fundamental to^tho democratic 'way

of life. . .Democracy to him is working from the bottom up. ..The Radical ‘

believes completely intoal equality of opportunity -.for all peoplesregardless of race, color, or creed. 11

* •

Much of what Alihsky professes does not sound "radical.” His are the words

-used in our schools and churches, by our parents and their friends, by our

peers. The difference "is that Alinsky really believes in them and recog-

nizes the necessity o^changing the present structures of our lives in

order t-o roalizo them.

There aro many inconsistencies .in Alinsky* s. thought which he himself

recognizes and dismisses. Hs believes that life is inconsistent and that

©no needs .flexibility in dealing with its many facets. His writings reflect -

the flavor of inconsistency which permeates his approach to organizing. They/>

also suggest Alinsky* s place in tho American Radical tradition. In order

to discuss his place, it is nocessary to circumvent his definition of “rad-

ical” based orjilmer psychological st(p^ngth and commitment, and to consider

more conventional uses of tho term.

Al though there is great - disagreement among writers about the def-

inition of “radical” and among radicals themselves over the scope of the

word's meaning, thcro is sufficient agreement to permit a general definition.

A - radical is one who advocates sweeping changes in the -existing- laws and——

—

methods of govomment. Thoso proposod changes are aimed at tho roots of

political problems which in Marxian terms aro the attitudes and -the behaviors

of men. Ridioals are not interested in ameliorating the symptoms of decay

but in drastically altering tho causos of societal conditions. Radicalism

"emphasizes roason rather than' revorence, although Radicals have oftoVi boon12

tho most emotional artd. .toast reasonable of non.” - -

M] I t i i i HU K \:- ; I i i 1 I | fs

i $ 'I K t ,i Mm MOrie Bi the strongest strains in modem radicalism is tho eigfateeri

century Enlightenment’s faith in human roason and the possible perfecti-

bility of man.This faith in the continuing Improvement of man was and is'

dominated by valuos derived from the French and American Resolutions and

profoundly influenced by the Industrial Revolution. The Industrial Revol-

ution shifted the emphasis of radicalism to an urban orientation. Atinsky*

holds to the basic radical tenets of equality and. teethe urban orientation,

but he does not advocate immedlato chango. He is too much in the world-

right-now to. allow himsolf the luxury of symbolic suicide. Ho realizes that

radical goals have to bo achieved often by non-radical, oven "anti-radical"

means. For Alinsky, tho non-radical means involve the traditional quest

for power to change existing situations. To further understand Alinsky *

s

radicalism one must examine his attitude toward tho use of power.

#.The key word for an Alinsky-type organizing offort is "power."

As he says: "No individual or organization can negotiate without power' 13 ‘

•.

•

to compel negotiations;" The question is how ‘one acquires power, and •

Alinsky* s answer is through organization': "To attempt to operate on good

will rather than on a powor basis would be to attempt something which

the world lr*.s nevsr yet experienced—remember "to make even good will, 1A

offoctivo it must he mobilized into a powor unit."

One of the problems with advocating mobilization for power is thof r

popular distrust of amassing powor. Americans, ca John Kenneth Galbraith ‘

points out in American Capitalism , are caught in a paradox regarding their

viou toward noi-ror because it "obviously presents awlcward problems for a

community which abhors its existence,'disavows its possession, but- values

,

/ . .

.

.

'15..

; ’-v •

' a/:/-:; *

,

its oxistenco." Alinsky recognizes this paradox and cautions against

allowing our tongues to trap our minds:*

*•_*• -^- - • • .. -

We have become involved in bypaths of confusion or semantics...Tho word * newer* h*«? through timo acquired overtones of sinister

corrupt evil, unhealthy immoral Machiavellianism, and a generalphantasmagoria of the nether regions. 16

'

. » " * *

—For Alinsky, power is the ,fvory essence of lifo, the dynamic of life 11 and

is found in °... active citizen participation pulsing upward providing a

unified strength for a common purpose of organization. . .either changing'

•

.17

.

•

circumstances or opposing change. '•

i*

Alinsky argues that those who wish to change circumstances must

develop a mass-based organization and bo prepared for conflict. He is a

neo-Hobbesian who objects to the consensual mystique surrounding political .

processes; for him, conflict is the route to power. Those possessing power

want tej^etain it and often to extend the bounds of it. Those desiring a

change in the power balance generally lack the established criteria of moneyi

*

or status and so must' mobilize numbers. Mobilized groups representing op-

posed interests will naturally be in conflict which Alinsky considers a

healthful and necessary aspect of a community organizing activity. Ho is

supported in his prognosis by conflict analysts such as Lewis Coser who

points out in The Functions of Social -Conflict that:

Conflict with other groups contributes to the establishment andreaffirmation of the group and. maintains its boundaries against thesurrounding social world. 18 -

• w

In order to achieve a world without bounds it appears essential for many

groups to solidify their identities both irjfrelation to their own membership

and to tholr external onvironmont. This ha3 boon the rationale of nation-

alist groups historically, and among American blacks presently.

The organizer plays a significant role in precipitating and directing

a community’s conflict pattern. As Alinsky vievs this role, the organizer* i

is_ _ r .

.

*

''

* / ;

" V '•

..

-

...dedicated to changing the character of life ofa particular cpnamnity

land} has an initial .function of serving as an abrasive agent to rub—- raw* the^rosentments of the people of the community; to fan latent hosw

* duties of^many of the people to the point of overt egressions*. ..k

to provide a .channel into which they can pour their frustration of thepast; to creato a mechanism which can drain off underlying guilt forhaving accepted the previous situation for so long a time.

&

-When those who represent the status quo label you^i.e.the com- •

munity organizorjas an 'agitator* they are completely correct, forthat is, in one word, your function—to agitato to the point ofconflict. 19 . \

An approach advocating conflict has produced strong reactions. Sorao

4 .

of his critics compare Xlinsky's tactics with those of various hate groups

-

20such as lynch mobs which also "rub raw the resentments of the people,”

'

V

Alinsky answers such criticism by reminding his critics that the difference1

t

between a1

"liberal” and a "radical” is that the liberal refuses to fight .....

for the goals he professes. During his first organising venture in Back of

the Yards he ran into opposition from many liborals who, although agreeing

with his goals, repudiated his tactics. They wore according to Alinsky

"like the folks during the American Revolution who said 'America should be21

free but not through bloodshed.*" ' When the residents of Back of the Yards

battled the huge meat-packing concerns, they were fighting for theirJobs ond ?or

their lives. Unfortunately, the war-like rhetoric can obscure the con-

structivenoss of the conflict Alinsky' orchestrates.-

(

In additional aiding in formation of identity, conflict betweeni

groups plays a creative social rolo by providing a process through which

diverse interests are adjusted. To induce conflict is a risk because there ...

, i

'

-f" •"*

is no guarantoo that it will romaln controllable. Alinsky recognizes the

.1

risk ho takes brtt bolieves it is worth the gamblo if the conflict process

results in(

tho restucturing of rolationsliips so as to permit the enjoyment ...

of greater froedem among men mooting as oquals. ,0rily through social equality'

. j ,

' ' ' *.•

;-.+-C

.

&

can men determine the structure of thoir ovm social arrangements.

The concept of social equality is a part of Alinsky *

s

social morality

.

‘

„*

. .. ,, 4

.that assumes all individuals and nations act first to preserve their'bwn-^

I

interests and then rationalize any action as_ idealistic. Ho thinks it • ?

is only” through accepting ourselves as we ,,roally,, are that we can begin ;; .

to practice ’trosl M morality:.

•

.. .

'v'

... ".

.

-

Thorn aro two roads to everythin g-**a lot* road and a high one. Thehigh road is the oasiest. You just talk principles and bo angolic re-garding things. you don’t practice. The low road is the harder. It is

. .-

the task of making* one’s solf-intorest behavior moral behavior. Wehave behaved morally in the' world in the past fen* years beoause we want •

the pGople of the world on our side. When you got a good moral position,

look behind it to see what is self-interest , 22 ' *

The cynicism of this* viexTpoint was mitigated somewhat by my discussing,tho -

question of morality with Alinsky who concoded that idealism can parallel

self-intorost. But ho believes that tho man who intends to act in the world- /

as-it-is must not be misled by illusions of the world-as-we-would-like-it-to—

23.

• t;.-

,

bo. . Alinsky claims a position of moral relativism, but his moral contort

is stabilized by a belief in the eventual manifestation of tho goodness’ ofV

man. He believes that if men were_allowed to live free from fear and want they

/'

'

x*ould live in peace, Ko laso belioves that only men with a sense of their own

worth and a respect for the commonality of humanity will -be able to create

this now world.

Therefore, the main driving force behind his push for organization

is the effect that belonging to a group working for a common purpose has

had or/tho ken ho has organized. Frustration is transformed into, confidence '

\ ...when non recognize their capability for contribution. The sense of dignity

is particularly crucial in organizational activity among the poor whom

Alinsky warns to beware of programs which attack only their' economic poverty,

Wolfr.ro programs sinco tho Now Deal have neither redeveloped poverty

areas nor even catalyzed tho poor into helping themdotves, A cycle of de-

pondoncy has bobn created which- ensnaros its victims into' resignation and

apathy.. To dramatize his warning to the poor, Alinsky proposed sending Hogroos

;

\ : • / -. ,

’

-

t•% .

,. . :

dressodinAfrlc.m-trlblO:~co3titoesto-fpreet-VISTA^olunteers-arriving-in— -----

Chicai'O. This action would have dramatized what ho refers to as the "col-

...•

•' *- ’ 2k

onialism M and the "poaco Corps mentality" of tho poverty pro pram.

Alinsky is interested in people helping themselves without, the

inoffootive Inter renco ftom wolfarophiles. Charles Silberman in his

book, Crisis in Black and White describes Alinsky.* s motivation in terms— 1-

of his faith in people: ’.

**«^~p-*

".

*'-V

— The ossential differonco between Alinsky and his enemies is that ,

Alinsky really believes in democracy; ho really believes" that the help--less, tho poor, the 'badly-educated can solve their own problems ifgiven the chance and the means; ho really believes that the poor and.

uneducated, no .less thar^/the rich aid'educated, have the right to •• decide

how thoir lives should be run and what services shouldoe offered to •

. them instead of boing ministerod to like children. 25

This faith in democracy and in the people's ability to. "make it" is pecul-

iarly American one]many might doubt its radlealnoss. Yet , Alinsky * s belief and

devotion is radical; democracy is still a radical idoa in a world where

wo often confuse images with realities, words with actions. Alinsky* s belief

in self-interested democracy unifies his Views on the use of the power/conflict

model in organizing and tho position of morality and welfare in ‘the phil-

osophy underlying his methodology. ' ' >; ,

CHAPTER I FOOTNOTES:

'

"PIato oh tho Barricades, " The Economist , May T3~19» 196?» p. 14,

>

! ‘ r

‘

.

-

' .

’'

.

'

'”Tho Profession^ Radical,*1 Kwor 1?; , Juno** 19^5) p« 3$*

^Tbld , ,p.''40.

'•

•^rbid . ,-po1

4j>.

s ,c''

°Caul D, AT inskyCRcv^l 1.1 o for R ~ -leal c. (Chicago : University of ChicagoPress, 1946), ’p. 4.

7Ibid . , p. 14.

8Tbid., p. 2?..

^Ibid. • .

•10

11

Saul D.ALinsky,' private interview in Boston, Massachusetts, October, 1968 *

Alinsl<y.'

'

Reveille for Radical g, p. 23.•NJ

12'John W. Derry, Tho Radical Tradition (London: MacMillan, 19&7), p. vii.

13•

Dan Dodson, "The Church, POWER, and Saul Minsky," Rollpjon in Life ,

(Spring, 1967), p. 11.

14.Ibid.

16

17

13.

hn Konnoth Galbraith, American Capitalism (Boston: Houghton MifflinCompany, I 962 ), p. 2&1 ”

Dodson, p. 12*

Ibid.

Lewis Cosc-r, The Functions of NSoclal, Conflict (Now York: The Free Press,

1956)> p. 8. _ ... r. _i

19.

.20

Dodson.

Charles E. sllberman. Crisis in Black and Whit

o

(Now York: Random House,i?64), p. 331.

’ “ “—2l -

T* v

. .ALinsky interview, Boston*

son. 1

TV MirnT-'vv interview in Wellesley, Massachusetts, January, 196

* -13-

’’ '.:

S"~« *•

'

i-

'

“ Patrick Anderson, "Making Trouble is Alinsky’ s Business, ” The New TorkTimes Har-mlno (October 9» 1966 ) » p. 29» -----

‘‘'^Silborman, p* 333* •

i

CHAPTER II’

THE ALIH5KY METHOD OF ORGANIZING: THREE CASE -STUDIES

Tho Alinsky.

method of community organizing has two distinct

* ‘.

*>% ..-'I'. •

elements. One, tho "Alinsky-typo protest” is "an* explosive mixtur© of

rigid discipline, brilliant showmanship, and a street fighter* s instinct1 •

for ruthlossly exploiting his onomy* s woaknoss.” Tho second, modelled ‘

•after trade. union organization mothods, involyos tho hard work of rec-

ognizing interests, . seeking out indigenous leaders, and building an

organisation whose power is viewed as legitimate by the larger com-

munity. It is difficult to discuss these two components separately be-

cause they nro woven into the organisational pattern according to sit-

uational necessity. Some organisational situations^need tho polarising

effect of "rubbing raw tho sores of discontent” wliilo others with well-

defined resentments noed loaders.

Another distinctive feature of the Alinsky method as mentioned

in tho previous chapter is the use of military languago. As Silboman

points out/such language is appropriata*for groups engaged in "war-liko”

— - —struggles for

...the only way to build an army is by winning a few victories.But how do you gain a victory before you have an army? Tho only/method over devised is guerrilla warfaro: to avoid afixed battlowhere tho forces .are arrayed and where tho new army f s ^weakness 1

would become visible, and to concentrate instead on hit-and-runtactics designed to gain small but measurable victories. Hence theemphasis on such dramatic actions as parades and rent strikes whose

objective is to create." a sonse of solidarity and community.

2

..5" •. > •' : v »

•

; ,.

.:=:

Although Alinsky* c goal of community solidarity and his .war. on power-

lossnoss has been co-opted intojthe ribric of the fcdorol welfare pro-„

grams, there is a continuing mistrust of his tactics. As has. been sug-

- ^.. . \ .... •

^

^V-, ..

gostod, there is no sot pattern for oach of his organisational efforts'*

"Thoro arc / however^? tactical guidelines which can'boapplied,in order to

fulfill tho following criteria o'f . an Alinsky organisation:

(a) It is rooted intho local tradition, tho local indigonous loader-—- ship, the local, organisations and agencies, and,in short, thelocal people.

(b) Its energy or driving force is generated by tho solf-interestof the local residents for the welfare of their children andthemselves,

*

(c) Its' program for action develops hand in hand with tho organ-ization of the community council. Tho program is in actual factthat series of common a£r-;cmonts which results in the develop-ment of the local organization.

(d) It is a program arising out of tho local people carrying . with itthe "direct "participation of practically all tho organisationsin a:partierliar area. It involves a substantial dogreo of indi-vidual citizon participation; a constant day *to day flow, of vol-unteer activities and tho daily functioning ofnumerous local com-mittees charged with specific short-term functions,

(o) It constantly emphasizes the functional relationship between prob-lems and therefore its program is as broad as the social horizonof the community. It avoids, at all costs, circumscribed and seg-mental programs which in turn attract the support of only a seg-ment of the local population.

(f) It recognizes that a democratic society is one which responds topopular pressures, and therefore realistically operates on thebasis of pressure,For the same season it does, not shy away from

. involvomont in matters of controversy.

(g)"It concentrates, on the utilization of. indigenous individuals,who, if not loaders at tho beginning, can bo developed into leaders. .

(h) It gives priority to the significance of self-interest. The organ-isation itself ,proceeds cn-.the idea or channeling the many diverse

.

forces of self-interest within: the community into a common dir-ection for tho common good and at the same time respects theautonomy cf individuals and organizations.

' "

(1) It becomes completely .self-financed at the end of approximately •

three years • This not only testifies to its representative characterin that the local residents support their own organization.finan-cially, but insures to the .local council the add test of_inde-pendoncej -'the ability to pay one's way.* 3 - •

'

i

iftSeU&i&Jig Jllihsky’s tactics apart from Ills actions is ilKe discussing

current theories of international relations without mentioning Vietnam

We will consider three of the organizations which Alinsky helped build,-f • ...

.*

. i J?

' v,' The first of the three is the Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council

which is the prototype community organization dating bafek to the late 1930 * s.> — <— -

_

i

. Alinsky* s involvement with the Council led to the" ostabliskment of the

Industrial Areas Foundation which subsequently coordinated other organizing

activities. Ons of the most important of these was The Woodlawn Organisation*

a black community group inbhicago. Alinsky frequently oncountors blacks who

view Alinsky* s efforts as just one more example of whito man’s power politics

gamo. He tolls such' critics that, "Sunglasses, Swahili, and soul food won’t- •

win power for blacks." Thirdly,we will look at the organizational prob-' TI

lems involved in the Rochester black community* s confrontation with the

Kodak Company. •

THE BACK OF THE YARDS NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL

Upton Sinclair’s novel, The Jungle , focused attention on the

stockyards in Chicago and the deplorable conditions of life in* the area

surrounding the Yards. This area, Back of the Yards, was bignmously wedded

to the meat-packing industry and the Roman Catholic Church. The meat fac-

tories provided jobs and the Cimrch minfstored to the spiritual and social

needs of its parishoners. The waves of Polish, Slovak, and Irish immigrants

c—

- beforo World Wur I^and Moxican immigration oftor^, supplied both workers and

parishone rsi Tho ir.jmigrants also successively lowered the wage scale and

fragmented tho Church Into bickering nationalistic divisions. The area’s

depressed economy was accompanied by acute environmental problems such as

overcrowded housing, Insufficient sanitation, rmpaved streets, few rec-

National facilities, high delinquency and crime rate^j—an^fcLnadequate

sohool3. Alinsky remembers tha_Back of -the Yards as. -’’the nadir <x£~ Amexdoan -

SllMV, \*!<W ^• .

A

Alinsky* s experiences in the Bnck ofthe Yard3 formed the basis* *'

^•

for his approach to organizing, but thoy^ire difficult to trace. Most of

the information related to Alinsky* s role in the fomulation of.the Neigh-'

. -

. Oborhood Council comes from Alinsky. He gives a third person account in

. i'

Reveille for Radicals , and he is always ready to rc-minisco about that ex- ....

4 , .

perience, Evelyn Zygmuntowicz* s account of the formation of the Council,

which is considered "authoritative* 1 by tho presont members of the Council, .

docs not mention Alinsky once by name excopt in the bibliography. V/hen

questioned about tho omission in tho Zygmuntovicz thesis, Minsky attrib-

uted it to Ms great success in building an organization which did noy7

mood him. That Alinsky participated in the organizing, and that his par-

ticipation led to the development of his organizational strategy is unde-

• 4 •,

•batable. It is generally accepted -among organizers, reporters,- and aca-.

.

. V *

demies that Alinsky was tho moving force behind the struggle. An examination

of tho available matorial about the Councils formation affirms that •

assumption. •

The organization of the Back of the Yards began at a mooting in the

local YWCA to plan a community rocroational program. Beforo the mooting

in the Spring of 1939 the Back of the ^.rds had been tho scone of various

community projects initiated by settlement houses, tho Church, and unions/.

Tho Packinghouse Workers Organizing Committee, an affiliate of tho CIO,~

.

;

,!

•

.'began organizing tho employees of Swift, Armour, Wilson, and the other

moat houcos with relatively little opposition. The lack of management op-

~

position right have bean anticipated sinco by tho late 1930*s many of tho

comptafties started moving out of the Chicago Yards. The success of tho union

.

'

.. i- ai# -

’

rbrganizinrr^ncouraged. others both in and but of tho community. A non-res-

id&it social worker initiated tho mooting at the YWCA out of which came the

birfartS*',. :

'* v

For fifty year? wo have waited for someone to offer a solution— |but nothing—has happened. Today wo know that we ourselves must face" p.; :

and solve these problems. Wo know what poor housing j unemployment, , "V'

and .juvenile ,delinquehcy means; and we are suro that if a way is tobe found wo can and .must find it. "

.' . .

* -

Wo havo stopped waiting. Wo churchmen* ^businessmen, and union menhave formed tho Back of tho Yards Neighborhood Council. This Council : r

.

‘ is inviting representatives of all the organizations—church, business,

social,fraternal , ‘and labor to particiapte in a conference...to thor-

oughly discuss the problems of joint action which can effectivelyattack tho evils of disease, bad housing, crime, and. punishment. 8 ,

~

Alinsky who helped draft tho Call continuod using his straight-

forward, solf-intorost approach to convince tho community that 'working to-.

gather was tho only hope for them. For example, he nover approached a Catholic

priest ip*terms of Christian ethics but on the basis of solf-lntorest such

9as. tho irelfare ofthiSr Church, even its physical property. Alinsky^ rec-

<.

.

* ..... •

ognition of tho Catholic Church as an "integral and dynamic factor in the

©XDerienco and lives of the •people’*- won him the supDort of the Senior Aux-' 10

iliary Bishop of Chicago, the Most Reverend Bernard J, Shiel, D.D. His;

^

. support helped bring together tho conflicting nationalistic Catholic ; >-

~~lffmrches; Then hostility between the Church and the unions lessened as

both recogrdzod the necessity of cooperation. Tho primary question was,

however, "cooperation" for what? Tho By-Laws of the Council (adopted l£ay,

1939 ) idealistically stated that

j

...this organization is founded for the purpose o f uniting all organ-,

izations within the community known as ’Back of tho Yards* in orderto promote tho welfare of allT rosidonts of that community regardlessof their race, color, or creed, so that they may all have the oppor-

r tunity to find hoalth, happiness and security through -t^e democraticway of life. 11 -

Alinsky remeifeors the atmosphere in the neighborhood as

.7•'’•••

...a holl hole' of hate. T. •»’ ' '

l;/hen people talk about Back of the Yards today, some of them uso ’\

v‘

linos liko 'mb resentments raw* to describo my organizing athods. How ’i

do you think when I went in there or when I go into a Negro community h

todAy I havo to tell then that tKey'ro discriminatod.against? Do you • •?

think I- go in thoro and get them-, angry? Don*t you ..think they have re-.

•r^Bontments to befdh' with,' and how much rawer can I rub thorn?..* , r"V:- *

•

"What happons when we come in? We say- 'Look, yr>u don’t have to

tako this; thoro is something you can do about it. You can get jobs,

you can broak the Segregation patterns. But you have to! have power to

do it, and you’ll only get it through organization. Because power

just goes to two poles—to' thoso who’vo got money, and those vho've

rot people* You haven't got money, so your own followmen are yourm# «*##**# ft#* aamvauig aoout it. • • ....

You'ro active. And all of a sudden you stand up. ^That's what happened in Back Of the Yards. 12

• t*

"i ,'

The process of "standing up," however, took' time.

The Neighborhood' Council ' s two immediate 'goals, to achievo economic'

. V'security and^to improve the local environment, catnpultod it into a power

struggle with the meat cotnpnaios.Vigorous activity stalled during ’World War14

* * •

H_becasue thero were fow groups ready to follow John 1. Lewis's lead and

interefere in any way with the war effort. During the War the Council did

.-

. * v*

solidify its support among all groups it constitutionally represented.. Organ—f • * ‘ __ \ ‘

. ,

ized business,for example, had been catalogued among the members of, the'

" n’

. V' '

Council but did not officially fora The Back of the Yards Businessmen's •

Association until 19^5* Local residents were kept informed of each other's

resentments through a community newspaper, the Back of the Yards Journal .

The Journal still operates on a cooperative basis with the. owner and a -

spociaL board of governors, representative of tho Council, controlling theJ ""

l.

weekly paper's policy.^

The organization bf the Council- and its oarly achievements in con-

solidating power particularly impressed Bishop Shell. After the fii^st annual

Community Congress in 19^0 he described- it as "ono of the most vivid demon- ;

' '

. 13;

strations of tho democratic process .that I have evor witnessed." Bishop : •**

Shoil enthusiastically introduced AJ.insky t^-larshall Field who suggested to -

:

Alinsky that ho carry his model and ideas of organizing to other areas of r. C*

tho country by means of a tax-exempt foundation. When Alincky was convinced'•

'

'-u.- - * v :

that Field did not^want him out of Chicago, ho accepted the position;

.

*•

- [*

r.-

•_/l

* ^ . ;, VI- .

©-? eyf the TriHnstrial Areas Foundation (IAF)worklnp; with ?.^^

* • 77 14.

'/ - - •

a beginning capital of $15»000. *

The Council moved into action after the War by fully, supporting

tho Packinghouse Strike of 1946^.providing the community with ^n opportunity

to mobilize- financial, medical, and moral, help for the strikers. Coordinated

through the Council, the Churches opened soup lines and child care centers; -

.

businessmen suppliod food; landlords ignored uppaid rents;, physicians of- .•

;

"15

•

jferod free services*. -The community backing of the strike resulted both

in a good settlement for the workers and in "’a. more powerful voice for the' •

Council. . ..

The Illinois legislature heard that loud voice when the Council!*.-

"‘ l-

^

voted in 1948 to’ lead a city-wide sales tax striko against the state ad-.• 16 "

.

ministration’s proposed cut in ADC funds. The state House of Representatives

admit to having been swayed- by public pressure directed by the Council

and restored the funds.

As tho Council’s political sophistication increased, it. moved beyond

/

tho tactical levol of demonstrating community solidarity, mainjpulating public

pressure, ancj threatening uncooperative residents with ostracism. In a 1949

confrontation with the city’s Health an£ Building Commissioners over its

enforcement of the housing codes, the Council’s Housing Committee compiledI

enough statistics to embarrass the housing authorities and prepared to

release thorn to the- newspapers. As a threat is often as effective as action,

houses were repaired.

Tho Council also took legal action against the Pennsylvania Railroad

on behalf of the residents whose health and .property were damaged from en-.

gino smoke, and against the meat factories whose stench fouled the air. The

Railroad was fined by the Municipal! Court of Chicago* and the packers were17 77:^ 7 -

"

forced to construct buildings to house their garbage.' 7 -.

' v7.

• i

0.

»

- - • •••-

. -In addition to each of its varied activities, the Council assumed

an educational .funotion by^carefully explaining every project to the res-

idents* Occasionally, the educative process was an end in itself as in the,

'

_i

case of the Council’s efforts ^introduce basic facts of nutrition to

the community. Daring the Spring of 19^5 nutrition was discussed at union

meetings, . in Sunday sermpns, and at school assemblies. No resident could

move through his neighborhood without being reminded to drink his orange Juice

More often the educational program was directed toward specific action^ such

as the creation of a local credit union. Although financial exports oxl

plained the credit operation, the union was managed by Council members who19 - '

•gained their expertise through action..

The importance of popular, parti cipatio'n in the Council’s^ activities,

essential in any community action project, was summed up in the 1948

Annual Report of the Executive Secretary. •

'

While the achievements of the Council are great in themselvds,underlying each individual achievemnet is the thread of the most-im- *

portant objective that we are working toward...the most important el-ement in democracy. By that I mean participation . I mean the recog-nition on the part

(

of the poople that democracy is a way of life which-can only be sustained through the pSii't of the people. Only when thepeople recognize that theirs is the. decision, the right, and the dutyto shape their own life, only then x-dll democracy expand and grow. *

:

That is why the cardinal keynote of the Back of the Yards NeighborhoodCouncil is: 'We, the people will work out our own destiny.' It is forthis roason-ithat I am asking you to keep in mind clearly that ©verysingle achievement which I can report tonight has behind it a histoxyof participation, of fighting and of awakening of a burning passionfor justice and brotherhood of man by thousands of our people.20

For the last thirty years the hope expressed by the Council's motto

has ofton. been realized as the carefully nurtured community power in Back- v

of the Yards affected the city, the state, and. even the nation. However, much

of tho community's influence is traceable not to its "burning passion" but ^•

'

|

‘

.*

. I ^ J 1 'Vetr

to its most iLlustrious resident, Mayor Richard J • JDaloy. •

Mayor paloy* s assumption of political power in the oarly 1950* s

curiously parallels the Council* s growth in power. Many of the Mayor’s

staff are also residents and share the Mayor’s loyalty to the neighbor-*

.

* '

'

hood, Whatever el so one may say about Daley, he has a genuine concern

for tho “forgotten” (white?) man^ and almost echoes Alinsky rhetoric-whon

speaking about tho Council. As he said in 1966,

...If we had in ovdry neighborhood, in ovory community, an -organizationsuch as yours we would have a much better city. ..Th'o efforts to solve. '.

our problems must como from the leadership of the community which isso excollontly displayed in your groat organisation. Tho leadershipand the solution must cone from a willingness of the peoplo to par-ticipate in solving their problems. No gcvemnontal body...will re-solve these problems alone...What a groat picture of the final essence of American government \this preconts. Tho businessmen, the religious leaders, the teachers,

all sitting down together, all trying to find, tho answers, trying to'

do something to help bettor their community. 21

Such words from the Chicago^ political establishment are anathema to

Alinsky not only because of his habitual anti-establishment stance^, but also

because of 'present conditions in Back of the Yards. The lower* -class white

workers in tho area foel threatened by tho accelerating pace pf social

change.' They. fear the loss of their factory dr‘ clerical jobs to automation

and their homes "to Negroes. The Council’s ability, to fulfill most of tho* f**'

residential, needs had locked the neighborhood so that few residonts ever

leave. 0no criticism of the Alinsky method is that such strong community• ’

organisations tend to “nail down” a neighborhood, retarding social and

political dovclopment. J

^

,* t

The collective nanifoctation of such retardation is reactionary, f

segregationist politics. Alinsky recognized such tendoncies irjfthe Autumn ,j|

o^ I968 when’hcwalked through tho neighborhood seeing Wallace posters and'

.

-."i;

'

- '

23"irJhito Power” slogans on fences sr.dcar bumpers. The Council's social

_- «.

worker, Phyllis Ryan, attributes much of the frustration in the area to . . _ -J|*j

***?%;.

1

• mWv-.

-

the younger residents who often do not oven know about the Council and its

.

•

.

24 .

•

• tlniversalist erode, ' Alinsky remembers that many young people from the -

yards area formed a crypto-fascist cadre in the late 1930's *~-He fought

against and for them onco^and may do so again.

. ,

*• r * »

„ .

T• THE .WOODLAWN ORGANIZATION

;

The obstacles confronting Alinsky in organizing the Back of the

Yards we re raitigatod by several factors. The Roman Catholic Church as well

as tho meat industry providod a cohesivoness to tho community which facil-

itated attenpts at mobilization. Various isocial pressures- accompanjjdng

the Depression opened possibilities for entranco into the political struc-

ture to groups such as labor. The Depression itself produced widespread’ •*

'

.' v

questioning of tho assumptions underlying existing social conditions which/ •*'

legitimized popular efforts to change* them. And the War years were good* * V

ones for organizing simultaneously against fascism at home as well as

engendering community spirit. All in all, many of the problems associated* •,

with coamuniti’' organizing in tho I960* s wore not cause for anxiety in

Back of the Yards. There was, for example, little questioning of the tra-

ditionally accepted meaning of "community" as "a group whose members occupy• • 25

a given territoiy witldn which tho total round- ofvlife can be pursued."

Tho rapidity of social change in modern America has not merely altered the

'. previous description but has rendered it inapplicable.

Its inapplicability, however, was not fully apparent as Alinsky con-

tinued his organizing efforts through tho 1950's* Operating with>torri-

torially defined assumptions, he appliod his model to poor areas all over

the world. There is little information regarding d:he actual organizing sit-

uations between 1946 and i960, and Alinsky is vague about them. One of the

most significant of IAF*s efforts during theso years is,.the Community

•' - ?

Service Organization, a coaliton of approximately thirty Mexican-American...... ~ . 26 , * J

&'-

* communities in California. Alinsky often worked -through the Catholic -

Church. and at tho urging of his friend Jacques Marltain oven. consulted with' 27

thu Vatican about development problems in southern Italy. A small group

of organisers including .Caesar Chavez, of California grape strike fame,

and Nicholas von Hoffman, now on editor of tho Washington Post , were trained

during tho 1950’ s » Alinsky’s baso of operations, tho IAF, remained in Chi-,* *

• . .• % i

cago, and his involvements thero led eventually to organizing the Woodlawn

sootion of Chicago. The organization of Woodlawn typifies many of the prob-'

*

lems of the 1960*3 just, as Back of the Yards did in" the 1930’s* It also. -

* »

illustrates changes in .Minsky* s theory and technique which are crucial .

~ to "an understanding of his evolving socio/political philosophy.,. ;

••• »

Overcrowded, delapidated housing, an increasing crime rate, high

unemployment, characterized Woodlawn in i960 as "the sort of obsolescent,

decaying, crowded neighborhood which social workers and City planners ‘

, v -28 . ,

assume can never help itself." With its predominantly black population,

Woodlawn exemplified the disorganized anomic areas resulting from missive

Negro migration to northern cities. The do'fcrioration of tho community,

located in an o.blong-area south of tho University of Chicago, began during. — *

.

the Depression and accelerated after World War II, so that by i960 the only»*

people benefitting from tho area were absentee slum landlords. Many groups,'• » ' *

•

osheclally ministers, tried to "stem the tide of slum culture" but with

very limited success, ,

•

Tho neighborhood ' s problems^ wo re compounded by the. threat, of urban

renewal’. The Chicago Defender , a Negro newspaper, in its series entitled £ ;,

’The Battle of Wood!arm" characterized the. threat as follows:

In tho contury since the Negro von freedom from slavery in .America,

the battle for freedom has never ceased and a variety of racial organ-izations has run tho gauntlot of devious bans., .to koop the Negro less

than a free and equal American,.* . 'x

But nothing has been moro difficult to contend with than the ‘newest

strategy of racial discrimination introduced in' tho past decade*..•* has f %hhswm& -Lts.

idoa Is basically good—toar down the slums and build now homes,..But tho experience of a decade has demonstrated beyond doubt that

in many cases urban renewal has meant Negro removal...And increasingly as urban renewal spread, the question in the com-

.munity has been: how do you fight a bulldozer and crane?30_ .

How, indeed, are bulldozers and cranes halted when they move with, tho-' enQV '

I

couragement of such powerful forces as a city administration and a univer-

sity behind them?

In the Spring of 1959 this question brought together a group of three .

Protestant ministers and one Catholic priest determined to. do whatever th$y. l*

could to -preserve the community. The action of these religious leaders was .

'

•, .

* V *' 1 ^ • *‘

’

i-ndloti-tiVo of •fchfci.jt* timoo, Ae Alinoky observed in i9^5*

The biggest change I’ve seen in the twenty years or so that I*vebeen involved in social action is the role tho churches are playing. 1 \Back in tho 1930* s and 4d’s an organizer might expect to get somehelp from tho CIO or from a few progressive AFL unions. There wasn’ta church In sight. But today they have really moved into the social'

arena, the political arena. They have taken over the position organ-ized labor had a generation ago. They are the big dominant force incivil rights. 31 •

.•

.-

.

Thhus, Alinsky was hardly surprised when the clergymen approached him for

help. Ho turned away the prlginal small group^ telling them to return when> •

* •.

*• . .

they had a moro representative committo and sufficient finanoiaL resources

to support organising activity. ’

.. . 1

The emphasis on financing is Alinsky’ s version of the "sink or swim”

doctrine. A community which oan first organize to achieve financial inde- •'

.pendenco has already" be gun to fight. The clergymen returned as members of

;

\ / •. i

’ I- \ ,

‘f

the Greater Woodlawn Pastors Alliance with support from many secular groups.

and with grants from the Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago, the United Pres- i 1.1

byterinn Board of Missions and the Ehil Sohwartzhaupt Foundation. In addition

to thes& grants, ill© cornnunity Itself had raised $27,000. Aiinsky t ins p8fu

„suadod to,_Tnoy©_ into_the^miasma of black inequality,, white racism, city

politics, university selfishness, and fedoral indifference,

* But, just how does one organize a miasma? The organizing followed

the flexible pattern 'of first sending IAF field^ann into the neighborhood’

to discover grievances, and to spot the elusive "indigenous" leaders, and '

[ yft/ . *. * *

*

then bringing the leaders together to plan action involving the community

in a demonstration of power. Nicholas von Hoffman, tho original 'field rep- “

t * * t.

'

resentative, answers the question about beginning offhandodly: "I found myself• 32

at tho comer of Sixty-third and Kimbark and I looked around. " '

% « =f

*.*

r Ktf.Zi' :;Voh Hoffman elaborated.on his views during a conversation with the VV

*'

=.

*>. ‘

, .» ' % 1

.

t*

'

* 1

aiithor, but he found it difficult to vorhaliz£ tho procoss whereby a

33 ,

.'loader” is recognized. He stressed the Importance of listening to people

as one attempts to get the nfeel"Vof an area, but, as with most successful -

organizers, ho finally reliod on his impressions and intuitibns. Von Hof- : 4 7

fman remembers the primary problem in organizing Woodlawn was the lack of .-

V

community leadership among the bfcck residents. ThatTblacks themselves rec-

ognized the void was pointed out by a staff member of the original Temp-

orary VJoodlawn Organization (TV£>) in explaining tho primary aim of TWO:

We* re trying to say to Negroes across the city, once you wake upand start fighting back for true representation and begin to criticizeand go aftor the next politicians who do not stand for what you want, _

then othoi’ Negroes who have beon intimidatod and frightened will over--

come their fears.'

Once a small group of Negroes really are emancipated—psychologically.and fvindanentally emancipated—and begin to fight without fear for theirfull- constitutional rights you'll havo more than the seeds of a gen-oral social revolution. You'll have tho boginning of one,3^ \ ,

7- ^

Dedicated to "fighting, back” the recruited leaders; had to>devise a strategy '»

during the Spring of 19&0 for TvvO's membo'rship^which by then included approx-;

imately sixty local businesses, fifty block clubs and thirty churches rep- •

‘

v ;

.7*'

.•

. .

• ‘resentiScl f»t tfa&exbsnd of Woodlawn* s one-hundred thousand residents*.

.TOb*S-jMrst project was a "Square Deal' 1 caapaiferi to ittijlfenioHt a. .

now Code of Business Ethics covering credit practices, pricing, and. :

advertising* During the early canvassing of the neighborhood to dis-

—-cover- grievances,-von- Hoffman-and-others- had hoard-many complaints"re- 7e- - -

garding tho local “merchants who overcharged and^short weighted their

customers’ purchases. This typo of complaint was one of tho more 'visible”* • - - VV ."*$•'}* 1*

•.. ; - ' 1

'

' v - f• -

resontments and could servo as a focus for an initial organizing attempt, v;

* . .*

.

***%

Host of the merchants patronised by tho community were in the -area and S’ -

•’

. .

1 Scould bo directly affected through economic pressure*, The Square Deal

. v; :

campaign was publicised by a big parade through the V/oodlavn shopping V >

district, and by oublic weighings of packages susoected of being folsoly.

35 -‘

. marked. Cheating merchants agreed to comply with tho Code, and thoir SS?'-

, * „

capitulation impressed the residents with Tht>’s effectiveness,

1What 7,-jQ really neodod, according to the Alinsky prescription,

was an enemy in order to trandate community interest into community,Action, \1 U -

.

‘ '

The Dnivo’rsity of Chicago unwittingly fulfilled that rQle with its an-

nouncement on July 19, i960, that it intended to eoctend its camous south- <\ *.

into Woodlhwn. There had been a history of hostility between the Univer-

-’

’ «*<• '

sity and tho community over the University’s Negro removal tactics in other-

south side areas ^ and over its general disdain^for the problems of the blcclc* *

_ .slums. The University, i’or its part, saw itself as one of the few first- -

rato attributes of the entire city necossarlly possessing a longer-rango/ * • • • —

•

vision than' that held by a present-oriented populace. The University, with

the support of the Mayor and business groups, was accustomed to having its

way and expected no more than a few protests in response to its announcement

,

Before the creation of TVK1 there had been few protests. One of the ;;'v

characteristics of what Silbernan refers to as the "life style” of a slurnh-•

;

is its pervasive rpftthy,^ Tho so who-.live-in our slums havejlbarned that,

I

they are on the bottom of the social scale but that they often have more

to lose from bucking the system than their middle class counterparts.

Personal experience with ..city politics in Chicago during th^yenrs__15>60^

1964 demonstrated to me the arbitrary power whi^h many politicians hold -

• *.

• *.

1-m *

. v_ /

over -their constituents. Welfare chec^s'”can be withheld because of "bnaccept-‘ - ’•

,,

1

* > • ; ,

;VfW*:

*.* • 7*.

able behavior. rt The precinct captain carefully tours his neighborhood before* .7 rm*!

'

each election reminding evoryono how to vote. How could on individual, even

if supported by friends, risk the loss of a patronage -job for some abstract

,

• ’ V, .

'

,

‘ *

principle when the tangible fact of a family’s needs facod him?t>

’

Silborman summarises the conditions afflicting Woodlawn and- still

affecting our nation’s hlujns: .

•* ^

.

Quite frequently, therefore, the apathy that characterizes the.

the slum represents what in n^any ways is a roalistic responso to a’ hostile environment. But realistic or not, the adjustment that is ^roaohed is one of surrender to the existing conditions and abdication •

of any hope of change. The result is a community seething with inartic-ulate resentments and dormant hostilities repressed for safety’s sake,but which break out oVery now and. then in some explosion of deviant

‘

or irrational behavior. The slum dwellers aro Jjacapable of acting, or-even joining, until these suppressed resentments, and hostilities arebrought to the surfacoNwhere thoy can be seen as problems—i._e. as acondition you can do something about. 37 .- 7 -

~.j> *

. Tr^D’s initial articulation of resentments against the University

-was not an instance of nrubbing raw the sores .of discontent,” Representing1 - . .

. - » • W •

*

the community, it merely’ asked the University for more detailed plans of Its .

land needs because more than fifteen-thousand people were involvod in any

^expansion. The University insensitively refused the request. Tito then de-y

* . i.

*•'

-> V'

raandod that the usually acquiescent .city defer its approval of the Univer-

sity plans until city planners*>roi;ked out a comprehensive, prospectus on / *~7.

Woodlawn* s future^. Tito accompanied' its demand with the threat of demonstrators

lying in front of bulldozers and hundreds of demonstrators at -a City. Plan

\ 7777',

38 . 7 .

" 7-'- c!

Commission Hearing. The demands « threats, and demonstration created ef-> :

° •• .' .

*. .. .

• , ,

feotive countervailing political prossuro~r©sul-ting.-in-the^eferwent' of city

,approval. : ' '

.

‘ v . .;

The Univorsity, probably with private assurances from the cityt.- _/

.

officials, still did not take TWO seriously anc!/ continued alienating tho

*• . *„

*

Woodlavn residents. One example of their political ineptitude occurred ih

• ".

the treatment accorded local businessmen. Businessmen are not usually

the ardent backers of community action since it is aimed at the status

quo that supports them, but after being insulted by spokesmen from the

University at an informational gathering called to explain the proposod ‘.

’

expansion, the Woodlawn Businessman' s Association voted unanimously to join •

39 -• ••

TWO’s fight. With their plans blocked and the forces of the community *,

*

arrayod against them, the Univorsity of Chicago launchod a smear campaign^. ,

... * - .

against Alinsky and tho IAF.V ’

‘

.

The attack, outlined in Silberman and other articles,was a strange

. one to launch in^Chicago^ as its primary thrust concerned the IAF* s involve- -:

ment with the Catholic Church. In a city whose leadership is publicly

\. .

('

. Homan Catholic, it makes little sense to fault a man for being "involved"

with tho Church. It is true, as University publicity men pointed out to

the city newspapers, that Catholic groups had aided Alinsly's work since

* 1940,- but never under tho delusion that they were aiding a "hate" distrib-

* ‘ - 4a :.

utor, nor aiding. a Catholic conspiracy to foil integration. Both of'’ these.

charges were echoes of ones that Alinsky had hoard before and answered before.

Ho once again pointod to the record of the Archdiocese ;in the advooacy .

' ... „ . .

ok integration.. Monsignor John J. Egan, director of the office' of Urban.

‘ ^Affairs of the Catholic -Bishop of - Chicago, had challenged one of the Unlver-?.

- sity's former urban renewal plans thus incurring that institution* s hos-41 -h-

tiHty, -

~-V.

Monsignor Srjan vigorously defended Alinsky from the University» . . ,

* '' . . n ...» *>..1

**

Attack and summed.up the attitudes of many religious leaders who have

supported Alinsky in tho following response to' a quostion about why. he

had worked with the IAFj r .••

^

We felt the fchurch had to involve horsolf in Helping people developthe tools which would enable them to come to grips with the seriouseconomic, social, and moral problems which were affecting their lives*;.

.

families, and communities. >.\

. We also knew" that there was needed a tool which would enable them toparticipate in a dignified way in the democratic process and which wouldgive them the training necessary for achieving in action the meaning ofthe democratic way of life and of realising their human and' divine dig-nity. ’

• «

•The Industrial Areas Foundation appeared to us to be the only organ-ized force with the skill, experience, and integrity to supply these

tools and organize in neighborhoods which had such a desperate need for. them.42

' *'

Most reports about the development of Ti£> stross the ecumenical nature of.

the undertaking. And Alinsky credits himsolf with being tho second most im-

.*0

,

v '

.

portant Jew in the history of Christianity. —- -.. -r

* -V *''

.

TMD»s fight with the University-had implications for subsequent

community action programs because it directly questioned^he concept of bur-

N ' '*•*.*eaucratdcally-controllod social planning. When the City Plan Ccnra'ission came

up with its comprehensive program for &he Woodlawn area in March of 1962

without having consulted the community, - TWO independently hired a firm of

city planners to examine the Commission's plan. Jane Jacobs, nationally

recognized planning oxnert, was so imorossod with TVJD’s efforts that, she4 4

44-;

' *

agreed to become a special consultant. Mrs. Jacobs secured the help of

other planners to prepare proposals-for the';*area that could rbe implemented

without, moving the present population out. Before, the days of' "raaxQiua/

feasible participation” the. residents of Woodlawn were asking to voice theif*

opinions to . the "sociologists and planners supposedly concerned with their

welfare. Still, however,- their existence was ignored* by the University, until

,y

~ those iaen most sensitive to shifts in public participation^

ciaiis, decided to act.

Mayor Daley 1 s personal tiate a t£te method of dealing with political •

crises deserves careful study* Groups war vdt^/one another for years until;'!' •

brought toother in his auspicious presence in some back room in the city

hall* After a few. hours of undisclosed activity everyone emerges smiling*

.’ ‘

•‘ 7 •

.-7

' In the Summer of 19o3 Daley forced the Chancellor of the University to• ’

*.

• V » j

meet with representatives from TM3 and to agree on a compromise which would

create homes as others were demolished and afford TV£) majority represen-‘

J‘5 '• ' M.

tation on the citizens planning committee. With the Mayor's help* TrO'

_

' #

. .

had won an important battle, although in most of its other struggles TWO . • •

and the Mayor wore squared off against each other* • ;

v ...

• •

One example of such a struggle was Tito’s sponsorship of a mass bus

ride to register voters at the city hall. On August 26, 1961, more' than

two-thousand Woodlawn resident boarded buses for the ride downtown. They

had been warned by tho local machine politicians‘ynot'tb arrive en masse ,

but in the psychology of Chicago politics, a warning has the connotation

of meaning that somebody is worried, P6r the residents of Woodlawn the’ " /

*’

„

realization that they could affect the city administration was a revelation.-.

, in line 'with what Alinsky regards the primo achievement of a concerted

popular effort. For Aiinslcy, as for many of tho participants, tho forty- •

.six buses wore a manifestation of newly found dignity. Men with dignity**

could attain some control over their liveg^as Tto continued to demon- ’

7, 7. / ' 7 j 7 ; 7 > j / -7- „• jXt

' ' -

strato/in its^fight for non-segregated schooling, decent housing, -and v,

sufficient police protection* Their tactics included picketing the; School i;

’

Board and the suburban .homes- of slum landlords; filing suit against the Zyp. p'

. .7- t .‘

. ,* '

. .7 (-

‘. ; ; : -

• '

. . v-.'

*V .•

-Board of Education for their- perpetuation of. do .facto .segregation ;public |y_ ...

duHpihg gfiiolge ' ah xirdttt "of ...thfc sanitation comn&ssion* Srhds^

sittinc-in . at:banks which hahdl6d slum Irmdiords 1 ’business* In many cases' *

,

the abrasive tactics .paid off with the /cancellation of double shifts

in the schools, the increased hiring of Negroes by city, businesses, growing

^responsiveness from the machine politicians, and even some property repair,

by 1964 was a pressure group within the city. It title was

changed from the" Temporary Woodlawn Organisation to The Woodlaw Organiza- *

tion. Its development had paralleled that segment of the civil- rights

struggle which reached its climax in the 19&4 Civil Rights Act. T'/JD stood

as a romarkablo accompli shmont^ and the Reverend Arthur Brzaier, then head •’

of TltfD, summarized Alinsky* s contribution: "Saul has done more to alert.

*.

• ;*„

«* '

black peoolo on how to develop reel Black Power than any man in the United,

4*6...

” States.1

" __The Silbcrman-book, Crisis -in Black-and Whit rr, admittodly pro-•

. v.

•

Alinsky, is the definitive source both for understanding the development of

TWO and for- sotting it within the oarly 1960*s context of our continuingr ’

.. .

u

racial crisis.' Silborman considers Tl*K)’s greatest contribution to be ’its

most subtle* it gives V7oodlawn residents the sonse of dignity that makes.47 .

it possible for them to accept help.” Unfortunately, that help wa3 soon

coning into Woodlnwn undor the auspices of the War on' Poverty in a project

that both prevertod Alinsky* s philosophy and misused his methodology.Ar ‘ .*

In 1965 the Offico of Economic Opportunity (OEO) made a grant of

$927 , 341 to T.‘£) to train several hundred unemployed school droputs, many

of whom were members 'of two area gangs, the BLackstono Rangers and the.

. .. _ r > .

Disciples. The' gangs were Involved In the planning and administration .of.

the program^with some members drawing salaries as recruiters or Instructors.

- The decision to' include the gangs, rather than jlherely dealing with Individ^

uals was ..dictated by conditions within Woodlawn. The two gangs, among the

most notorious in- CM a ago »- are bitter enemies whose.wars have terrord^ed—

^

V

the south' sido for years* TV3D, if- it wore to maintain its legitimacy, had

to contend with them. Tito’s efforts to roach the gangs were coo'rdinated

bjr the Roverend John R.* Fry, pastor of the First Presbyterian Church.4 A

“in-WoodlawnT^Although white, the Reverend Mr. Fry managed to gain the con-

fidence of the HLackstono Rangers and offered tl^em the use of church'

f* hifacilities. His congregation agreed with his work and when tho federal

grant was awarded, the church became the center for tho training programs.;

The political ricks of such. a program, bypassing City Hall and employing

young "criminals", wore obvious. •

The first sign of trouble eamo. in November, 19^7 > vhon OEO firod’

''43

Jorome Bernstein who had served as agoncy liaison to Tito. His removal,

w'ao «*«*«* «ppi±od from tho Mnyor* a office end the Polled

Department through Congressional Representatives such as Rtp. Roman49

'

- ...

‘

Pucinski. With coincidental timing the Chlcaro Tribune, a conservative

Republican defender of the Democratic city administration, ran a series..... -

'

<L. ..

of articles on gangs in the city emphasizing tho Blackstone Rangers* role

in Tito’s anti-povorty projoot. Then cane the announcement oarly. in June,

1963, that tho Permanent Investigations Subcommittee of the Senate .Govern- •

’ ***

Tnent Operations Committee would hold hearings to dotomine whether OEO

funds wore being used to buy peace on Chicago's south side by bribing the-50 '

two gangs. Tho Subcommittee’s chairman, Senator John L. McClellan (D. Ark.)

had been "out to get" the OEO, particularly tho Community Action Programs,

and had chosen the Wood!awn grant as his targot. It was a predictable choice• - .•

-i-v

"' .’

..

•'

not only because of the existing hostility between city hall and TWO

bet also because of antagonism from the official community- action agency.

McClellan's investigators spent months "scrounging around the South Side ; :

1 ;

. '

.51

:

of Chicago fpridibt V discredit the OH) job. projoct. rt.It should not

SllM&iLl a jnl Belaiise ot tie ioo^ib#.in_^JLPPL ^

going to Be gang memberstaking advantage of the fed*

oral money; 'and -the investigators found thorn. There will also be cpramuni.ty

members dissatisfied with either the goals or the performance of the pro-;4 ?V#S&4 - — - * - --’—S'*--*---. .

=•-

- ^- :

'T':

gram for their own .personal reasons; and the investigators found them.,

Other, groups in the city are going to resent the opportunity offered to the

gangs through TV£>; and they were certainly vocal about their damaged in- •

’ "

terosts. And, of course, there is the political systom which usually foels4

threatened by innovation; and McClellan rallied them. ;

The hearings openod on June 20, amid hoadlino- grabbing charges that

tho Reverend Hr. Fry .aided the Rangers* illogal activities. Tho central. , .

..

-J .

‘

accusation made by an ex-Ranger chief was that Fry had allowed the church• 52 •

, \ / *-;t;to bo uood as on Tho pollco had raided . tho ehuroh and discovered

a cache in its basement, although Fry and other church authorities olaimed •

-the police.* knew the weapons wore there because they had helped supervise

their storage. Amid charges and countercharges the Reverend Arthur Brasler

called the McClellan, hearing a "oolitical conspiracy to discrodit a program'

. .> '

.

-53conducted by a black community and controlled by black people.’1 .Mayor

Daley answered Brazier in his bluntly“revealing manner by calling tho

chargo rtotally-absurd" and "strossing that "wo would have nothing to do

^ •

/ with gang stractv.ro or financing them."

Director Bertrand M. Harding issued a statement on Juno 2^, an-

swering some of tho allegations mad?.' during tho hearings and said that

•

; t>> at 0Z0 believe it imperative that some means be developed to reclaim’

these poor; hard-core youth... t6 tost whether the mechanisms of the gang •

;. structures could not assist in shifting attitudes toward productive /adult -~

* . ‘ -.

- • -

citizenship."_

• ,v v- yy ‘

.

'

- Thern Is TV£»‘s ^ fiasco-lf rbtdi' tho Royorend Mril ?vf* s"'©arn'estii|

I

* ;^r r

1

? ,

'#

^•'••

» .

V',.v- vv.;- V. Jlzs-s

^ineptitude ' to the project’s "South Side" elements—an incrodiblo" naivete. ;

-;

'& --r~j -7; "

'

- ' • ' - - t-v. •- “"7y

Nathan GLasor has explained:' it as if—’’someone had been convinced by a.~ *

# % /* ^*V. .

' •' ^.sociologist that chan^ and- reform are spurred by conflict- and decided •

- that,-since all•

good things can come from the American Govornrtent, it

ought to provide conflict, too." Alinsky* s lossons in organizing and,,* . * *•"

'

v »

_...

t*

_

•.

.

mobilizing community action independent of extra-community strings appear

to have been lost in tjie faco of the lure of OEO money. TWD , s control

over a local program designed for -obtaining jobs had shown some progress

urtil.,.the Washington manna arrived. Operating with many .of Alinsky* s

assumptio'ns, OEO* s- effort stumbled under a proliferation of pressures. .

TWO, however, gtill exists despite the ravages of bureacracies, Black

Power demagogues, and internal conflicts. That it survives at all is a-,

-'testament to its adaptability bui^t in by its democratic/repre sontative

features. TWO f s presence in the community and its autonomus cooperation

with the neighborhood gangs is frequently creditedpor the the lack of

racial violenco in Woodlawn. •

ROCHESTER’S ’FIGHT

Although TVS), created in the earfy 1960* s, is credited with chan-

nelling frustration away from rioting, after the burning summer of 19#S

^ ' community action entered a new phase marked by increasing black militancy

.and unrealistic federal promises.- The Economic Opportunity Act of 196k

launched the War on Poverty with many of the premises of the Alinsky

method. Before examining Alinsky* s effect on the federal'” planning one bthe‘ -

.

'

;

*'* ’ *>' jik** O '-' i f*'.

'-.1 % V-jr’' *

J’

''

•

: ’:

v •

-

'•

.*

example of. independent organizing will be described because it adds to

an understanding of Alinsky* 3 strengths and weaknesses. **'

•

* :/;

* :

v.

-

'

‘

; .... .. *

.

‘*v: wr'

*•*•'

***'•'•. *

_ FIGHT in Rochester, New York, was a direct response to the riots

that bitv 5 n JuT yr i$6^K ‘The riots, resulting in himdreds injured and. :

- ' ' ' v .

- - . ••.

' -- v

' •

'-M''

<». .*.

; ^,4

A ‘

** / ;» . • *

JilUJEL 1 Lake; m i iUiLami lit.,* ' '

. S? v _ -

: . .

• * '•_.±

which-Alinsky dubbed "Siragtown, U.S.A.". -Gerald AsiorT s description,of

-v Rochester is..wort<h.‘rep.eatlng: "...an upstate conservative city, a oil-.;x i!tod the" apple Knockers. • .funded Jipeai

5B

dominated by an oligarchy and infected with a sdvere case of ^ettoittsi w " ;:r

• Once again,' clergymen led the move toward organisation. Their first choice

was not Alinsk^but the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) .

which they, invited into the city under the auspices of the Rochester Area

V.‘

x,- 59•

'•.

Vf:

Council of Churches.. When the SCLC non-vlolenco doctrine proved ineffective .

.

\*- » *

.

- ' * •;

in the riot-tom ghetto, Alisnky was asked for his help, .

The Council’s invitation to ALinsky coupled with a two-year pledge

• .

;

C

'

*'

* *V4

of $5^>000 polarized the city. Such polarization between those who be-1

. • V*-T.-

*‘I '

.

lieved in him and those who denounced him as a hate-monger, delighted Alinskyj• V .

'

;

"In order to organize, you must first polarize. People think of controversy

as negative;- they think consensus is bettor. But to organize, you need a6°

Bull Connor or -a Jim Clark." With memories of fire houses dancing in

thoir .heads, the residents of Rochester settled down for a long, bitteri\

. ...conflictv-For a variety of roasons they wore initially surprised. First

• of alL, there was no Bull Connor in Rochester and the oity administration

. I * '• , .

*

was not so stupid as Jim Clark. When the incipient FIGHT- organization

. .. — -t r-r.'

complained about housing or garbage pick-up/ the city administration ax*-

- ranged a settlement. It was also six years after TWO* s -beginning and, 'as'

. :

'

- \ ;

'

*

•.

• 61 -

Ed Chambers,’ the IAF field man, said, "...the enomy is more sophisticated. ” :

• •

... Y_

.-

., ^ v

FIGHT- (the acronym stood for: Freedom, Integration, God, Honor, ’.

:

••

. .

~I---

Today until Independence replaced’ Integration)' became; an offilial: Alinsky-

^ model Peopie* s Organization in June, 19^5> when it adopted: its. constitutiohr' /

and elected its first president. The president, the Reverend Mr. Franklin/

' FJ rtrflnrn. -i *** "^^-4tlbr> ofxover one-hudred- organizations as “the1

,

• von* control* ot an urban renewal bitizeriB : btfiiiiiitdS JWjt* ! ;x'•* •*:}

placed three directors on the.board of the local *anti-poverty- pro gram*

Chambers recounted the. strategy of escalated demands used by FIGHT~inits_ j,~

'' ”*

/

struggle with the city-controlled agency: .

We subjected them to constant harassment. Our first issue wasthat the public business can’t be conducted in private, If thoirboard wont into private session, we would force our way in. Theyfinally realized FIGHT .is hero to stay. They said to themsolves,, ,

’We’d better give those people something to shut them up.’ So theygave us throe people on their board and $65 ,000.63

The $65,000 'Federal anti-poverty grant awarded in 1966 to FIGHT tottrain

one-hundred Negroes to pass the civil sorvico examinations,64

• negotiating stength.

added to FIGHT’ s"

FIGHT usod its now respectability to petition tho New York State ‘ ‘

Education Commissioner to use groator speed in ending do facto school.;

segregation..'FIGHT also arrangod for on-the-job training at Xerox for fif-.

• V

teen blacks. All of those activitos were preparation fo-r FIGHT’s challenge , ;

to the Rochester-based Eastman Kodak Company. Tho company with 40,000 non-

unionized' trarkers is tho largest employer in tho area. FIGHT charged Kodak

with ignoring the needs of blacks/and askod the company to train 500 Negro

youths for semi-skilled positions. ”If 'Kpdak can take pictures of the moon,65 •

. . . . ;•

it can create jobs for our people,” said Florence. His words wore ampli-*

. % •

fled by threats of direct action such as picketing the plants and even, . - - . '

the homes of Kodak oxeoutivos.

The President of. Kodak in 1966, William S. Vaughn, agreed to talk

with FIGHT and designated assistant vice-president John G., Myldor to

handle the negotiations. On Decembor 30» 19^6, Mulder and Florence, signed f ;

this joint . statement: "ThoFIGHT. organization, and Kodak agreed to ah ; ob-:

>

joctive of the recruitment'and referral (to includo screening and selection)

of 600 Unemployed people ' over a 24-month period, barring unforeseen,

economic «...

'file.tdvnwivnity. M

66 _ v- * -V

Titers. .wore immediate umoreseon cnanges" quu uiwy worn poxx

rather than economic ones. Shortly before the joint statement, Vaughn had '

.

*•

’** — • . 4 :

.•••'• *

been made chairman of the board and Kodak’s new President, Louis K# Ellers, ' -

publiolyTrenegod on the' proposal. Eilers instead asked FIGHT to cooperate• *

.

- - ." s .

"•

in a comoany project which he described as "the *r(dto hope for the poo?

.

* ‘• 67

..

•. . ... H

of Rochester#” The black poor were not interested in any white hope# Janiest

Ridgeway skilfully eounterposed Florence’s reaction to Eilers with Eiler’sJ;.'-

• • • ’

J

•

1

- • > * * '*X ‘

attitudes:#

- ...

’They talk about America being a melting pot,* said Florence, ’butv

the question right now is not whether black can melt, but whether theycan oven get into the pot. That's what FIGHT has been trying to do—get some of them into the pot at Kodak...

. , \’

‘ 1 ••

'

’From what I have been able to loam of other Alinsky efforts

this one seems to be developing according to his patternP Eilers' said# •

’An lssuo is piokod. Community conflict is croated by muoh talk, noiseand pressure and the creation of confusion. 1

^v

’In our case, the issue the Alinsky forces chose to be related tothe employment of Negroes. ItMs more and more clear, however, that all

the talk about unemployment is only an issue or device being, used to .

screen what FIGHT is really doing—and that is mating a drive for powerin the community. ’68 - •

*"}

":

Eiler’s i*ords were particularly ironic as Alinsky had tried to stay out of •

Rochester. In every organizing effort his goal is to become dispensable

as quickly as possible, and with FIGHT’S strong black awareness, he left

even more of the decisions to the FIGHT leadership. He helped develop a *

parallel group of whites, the Friends, of FIGHT, because he believes that

'Negroes need vhito allies. The relationship between FIGHT and their Friends .

was an uneasy one until they joined forces against Kodak. * •

'

;

;

The need for a new strategy to use against Kodak brought Alinsky s

*• »• • * . .. .

.M'

*’.**.

*

back into the fight. Influenced by the white liberal support * offered to j

!

iFIGHT, he decided to "Fight Kodak", through stock proxies: ’Liberals can- V;

;; .

*

.

• ,

*

'... 69 *

go to cocktail parties and lot their pro^dles do- thework# " Alinsky moved

around the country presenting the FIGHT side of the' controversy, concen- J.... ... _ ; ...

.• -y

'

' tratdnpr bn church rrYTtins *^He 3poke to the National. Council of Churchfes and~£:j|y^;

f• -39-

tho National Convention of Unitarians. When the latter group voted its~ .*

,

' •/ V..\ *' / *.

stock proxies behind FIGHT and against racism, '.senators and congressmen •

'.

70 .. ;affected by church prossure became interested. Alinsky also attempted

.

'

to coordinate a nationwide boycott of Kodak goodj^ which was a failure .

within the tradition of ’unsuccessful national boycotts.« '

.

"4 *'•

Eventually, recognizing FIGHT’s legitimate demands and responding

to political pressure, Kodak wired FIGHT: "Kodak recognizes that FIGHT*

as a broadbased community organisation, speaks in behalf of the basic need3^71 -

of the Negro poor in the Rochestor area.” Kodak agreed to work with FIGHT'

but made it very clear that , ”CWjfe’re not in the Welfare business, that’s72 ,y-„;

the government’s job.” Although FIGHT in 19&7 considered the telegram a

victory, in 19&9» three years after the abortivo Florence/Mulder agreement,

Kodak has renewed its delaying tactics. The company is supposedly waiting

to see what happens with the Community Development Corporation Bill (S-30),

but at the rate that the ninety-first Congress i$ moving it could be a

long wait. ”>r-V"

$o there will not bo a new plant built in the ghetto during the A

next. few years: where does FIGHT turn next? This is still an unanswered •. A... ,

-

question and for many black and white Rochester residents no, longer an r.

'' urgent one. FIGHT leaders consider the organization’s greatest accomplish-^*

:"-. \ - 73 -

ment to be the new spirit with which it infused the black community. ; .

•

' ''

,

‘: '

’ fironically, many whites thank FIGHT for stabilizing the post-riot community. • i

CHAPTER YE FOOTNOTES :

TT7 ”•

Anderson^jo. 28«-.--

2SHbQXTOan, p. 335«

1' ;>’>•—,^

1.,,., lM -

,:ui.iSl

D. Alihsky, "Citizen Participation and Community Organization in•’ >Planning and Uii>an Renewal," Speech presented before The Chicago

Chapter off the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment .

Officials? January/ 29 > 19^2 (The Industrial Areas Foundation:*. Chicago, Illinois;,' p.7-8.- ’

- . ‘

,*“• •••• :

'* \

‘ ';

^"Agitator Zoroes in on the Suburbanites, ” Businoss Week , February 8, ,

1969 , p. 46. ^ .. .

c ,

*•.

•^Evolyn' Zygmuntoxdcz, "The Back vof the Yards Neighborhood Council andIts Hoalth and Welfare Services” (unpublished Master of SocialWork thesis, Loyola University, 1959;, p. 9*

^"Agitator Zero os in on the Suburbanites,” p. *16 .•- *•

r'

• ?Alinsky interview, Wellosley.•’

’‘

^Zygmuntowicz, p. 23.‘

v •

’

•9»fThe Professional Radical,” p. 45.

^Zygnuntowicz, p. 42.• to • *

.

:^Tho Back' of the Yards Neighborhood Council, 27th Annual Report (ChicagoIllinois: Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council, 1966), p. 1.

1 O •

'”The Professional, Radical,*7

p, 46.-

yx -

.

'

.. .

’

^Zypnuntowicz, p. 29. u1

4

*#r”Tho Professional Radical,” p.

V>Zygcauntovri.ee, p. 53 •

l6Ibid.. p. 54..

46.

t *

i?.

18

Ibid . , p, 60.

19

Ibid., p, 65

•

Ibid.':’' ... •Vv

- 20Tho Back of .the Yards Neighborhood Council , -Annual -Report of the Exec-'

1 V I utive \ Illinois : Back of the Yards Neighborhood' > Council, 1943), p. 1. .

'

21,27HT/IWW*} r-\ p', 27-29-

Bruckner, ”Aiinsky Rethinks the Idea of Community,” Washington' •

• \.Post, -February 20, 1969, p. Gl.‘

.

• ”. • \ .

^Alinsky intenrieTT, ’ Wellesley,• * * (

* «, ,

.^Phyllis Ryan, Back of the Yards Neighborhood tkmncil Social Worker,

private 'interview in Chicago, Illinois, Japuaiy, 1969*

^0Cy Chinoy, Sociological Perspective (New York; Random House, 195*0 » p* 30*

.

26Silbenaan, p._ 322. ' •

*

’

,

*^Alinsky intorview, Boston . ' • j

^Silberinan, p, 320..

. "f

t. ... .* ' \ >•

^Stephen C.Rosc, ”Snul ALinsky and His Critics,” Christianity and Crisis ,

...(July 20, 1964), p. 149. .

* v 1

,

^Ernestine Cofield, ,rMinistors vs. Evils of Urban Renewal,” Chicago .1

Defender Magazine , Novembor 19, 1962, p. 9« •* .V '

.

^ ”A Professional Radical Moves In On Rochester,” Harr,or’

s

. July, 1965, p* 53 •

32Silbcrman, p. 328. v

^Nicholas von Hoffman, interview by telophono in Washington, D.C*,October, 1963.

* - »»

r>L-

-'Cofield,' Ministers vs. Evils of Urban Renewal,” p. 9»

^Silberman, p. 324.

,

36Ibid.. p . 334.

37Ibid .• ^

.

^"Ibid.. p. 336.’’

< 3-Ibia ., p. 337.•

~ '

_r ’ '1 4 jr

;*'

°Ibid . , p . 339^341 . . . 1 •

JlI•^

Ibld . .

•^Very. Rpv* Msgr. John. J, Eran, ”The ^trchdiocose Responds,” Church Mettop-

.'oils, (Summer, 1965), p» 16, ••

; v

43'

'

v •• r . ,

- ' V- 7 .V\ /' V-'*

**••: '*V: 4 {?•

_ALinsky interview, Boston*..

hii .

‘'

• ..'•

Ernestine Cofibid, ”How University of -*Chicago :Was-Stoppfed^^ '

Community,” Chioapp Defender Magazirie^,"November 21, 1962,-p»'9*.

. ‘1 V-.‘ - -

•

'

v”

. . .. 5l.

- -^Stephen C. Rose, "Power Play 'in the City," Crossroads, (JanuaryuMarch, | |

46

^p. -12*

Gerald Astor, "The ’Apostle’ and The ’Fool’

,

w Look, (Join© -25,' 19^8).»

47,

' 48

Silberman, p# 348* » -. ..... .

v* * * V a .

David Sanford, "South Side Story,” The New Republic, (July 6, 1968)* p. 13*

49-r

Ibid*

^"Support of Chicago Gangs,” Coricressional Quarterly , June 28, 1968, p. 1590»l

. ^Sanford,

•^"McClellan and the Informers: Bigotry’s Bedfellows,” The Christian Century , 4

(July, 1963), p. 887. >- 1*•

; |

^^Williara Jones, ”TVvD Chi of Assails Testimony,” Chi carp Tribune , Juno 22, ,

1968 , p. 4..

;

• V‘

^Willion Jones. :

'

^”Support of Chicago Gangs.”^

•. r £' :

‘

;

^Nathan- GLazer, ’’The Grand Designvof the Poverty Program,” Poverty? Power

and Politics, ed. Chaim I. Waxman, (Now York: Grosset & Dunlap,1963 ) , p. 290.

57• Anderson, p. 30.

•5®Astor, p. 34.

59Anderson, p. JO,

^°Astor, p. 34.

^Anderoon, p/ Jl,

* Ap *J

‘ '

^° .James Ridgeway, "Attack on Kodak,” Tho New Republic , January 21, 19o7, p. 3°.

63Anderson, p. 87 .

^Tbid ,

,

6%ddo, p.- 89 .

geway,.p«, 31'.

’ ' „ „ - t ,

t*, P* 30*

6o- Oirer,

?°Ibld.

*71Ibld .

72Ibld .

73/-'Anderson, p. 92 4

rsv:;v V,},/;

:

‘„v ^

”‘‘V

vyY ajVV ;.

, v’’

• - ' ->k 1

CHAPTER HI

"A prize piece of POLITICAL PORNOGRAPHY"' i * - «

One of the more intri (^uing puzzles to s^Ive concerns Alinsky* s

rel.tionship to the War on Poverty. That ho greatly influenced the logis-,

* • v •>

* . / "t« ’

_‘

,

lation seems evidont. That fie despises the effects of that legislation,

- is undeniable. The key to the puzzle involves both Alinsky* s effect on **

. ,

.-the poverty warriors and his response to them..

•

‘• Daniel P. Moynihan who helped draft the. original poverty^ legislation

* .

has doscrlbed his understanding of the origins and failures of the community• ..-.'*•••

action programs in his book Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding *. Moynihan

,

writes in a spirited style but evon his behind-the-scenes stance' does not*,

nako his argument less confusing*- Ho dissects the so-called "opportunity

. •#

theory" articulated by Lloyd E. Ohlin and Richard A. Cloward, both of the* -

* ^ ‘ ’ —

Columbia School of Social Work. He points to the theory -as the basis for'

--

. 1

many of the premises underlying the Economic Opportunity Act. Moynihan

sets up a sequence leading from the Cloward/Ohlin thesis to the Mobiliz-

ation for Youth (MFY) project in New Ygrk City to the federal legislation

which is perhaps .chronologically correct but seems to miss the point. If,'

as Moynihan states, "the central concept of each program (MFY and OEX)) <

* ‘

• '2. . ,

. . ,

is 'that of opportunity" then what did the "maximum feasible participation"

_• N • % *

._ clause mean? Moynihan indirectly defines it in the following way; 1

;The community action title, which established -the one portion of .1

' V:t,

the program that would not bo, directly monitored from Washington, •

should provide for the. *maximua-jfcasiblo narticitation of the res- . t ..

idehts of the areas and the members of the rrour>

s

1 involved in the v'-'f

local programs. Subsequently this phrase;was taken to sanction a &specific theory of social .change, and there were thoso present in

'

,

-

Washington at the time who would have drafted just' suck-langgagp;;.. P: .

with precisely that_objoct.3- 1-. —.- 4-...

..

•

' "P;

i

Moynihan continu.es explaining that his understanding of the original .

nurposc of the clause was to ensure. the participation .of persons, espec-' .

'

/*._ .

. 4ially in 'the South, .who were normally excluded. f«>ta-th6- political process* 1

‘But, in such areas real participation in docisiory-raaking would precipitate ;

asocial change on a seal© far wider than extension of opportunity to partake

-in already functioning' results of decision-making suggests. .. ;

'v

Part of the trouble with Moynihan* s analysis is that he defines neither

,

"participation** nor "social chon go” as operative terms. There are, of course,

rhetorical allusions to the need for men to play groator roles in shaping

their own live^.and "to the dire state of twentieth-century America* Ho

“

- yo .

echoes Gunnar Kyrdsl's warnings that tho country has far toAin Insuring

democratic participation on all levels of tho political system, but ho conf.* — i

eludes. that .the community action programs "with their singular cmphaikLs

on 'maximum foaslbl*e participation' of tho poor themselves comprise the •

most notable effort to date to mount a systematic social response to the- 5

'•

. .

prob.lom Myrdal outlined. .

Yet, there is littlo Senso of what Moynihan refers' to vhen he uses

that word '•participation*1 especially as t^o keystone to a MS7stematiceven

social response." He/questions the entire theory of participation using

* a quote from tho work Bernard J. Friodcn and Robert Morris did on alionaticnj

~'Least convincing have boon those analyses which have assertedthat tho fact of participation by the poor, in itsolf, will sig-nificantly niter the conditions deplorod, as for example, the beliefthat civic participation in itself leads to a reduction in deviantbehavior. 6 .

‘

Somehow Alinsky's use of participation as a process through which individualsj.

..determine the action to be taken by a' community organization has been lost

.

.'.t /. ’./'i, .

...

* ; *. . • >

" In tho acadwdcTbureacratic -crossfire. What. 030. and Moynihan seem to mean .

'

by "pstrtf ef pat?*&

^

IfvcAvss tHe. incorporation of the poor and ""deviant”; .

,.v y.

.their acquiescent participation.

* ~ ‘' In his appropriately titled articlo, nBy or For the Poor?”, Andrew

% 1 »

»'

'j,'

Kopk&nd diwauflftoa tha contradiotionc inhoront^Ln the participation cleanse?

What was new and exciting about the V7ar on Poverty was that it•gave hope of. putting somo political and economic power into the. handsof the ’under-class* of tho poor, as labor legislation had strength-ened the’ bargaining power of workers throe decades earlier. Throughthe Wagner Act, -"the workers got recognition : they used their new power"to win economic -benefits. In tho same way, the maximum feasible par-ticipation clause in tho OEO legislation promisod recognition and thuspower to tho poor.?

* . •

Recognition of the problem of poverty among legislators perhaps, but there

was little realisation among them that their legisl ating participation mighti

result in any alteration of power.

Moyrdhan occasionally acknowledges the incompatibility of legislating• v .

participatory planning (!_.?>. ”truo M participation) and expecting a consorVativ

Congress to- continue funding it once they perceived what they had writ.

One of these instances occurs in a long passage about Alinsky:

Tho blunt reality is that sponsors of community action who ex-pected to adopt the conflict .strategy of Saul D, Alinaky and at thethe salsa time expected to be recipients of .largo sums _of -money,looked for, to paraphrase Jeffersgn, *what novor was, and never, willbe,* Alinsky emerges from the 19^0* s a man of enhanced stature. His *

influenoo on the formulation of the antipovorty program was nbt great.

Indeed it \*as negligible, in that a primary motive of these effortswas to five things to the poor that they did not have. Aginsky’s, law,laid dovm in Reveille for Radicals , which appeared in 19^>* was ; that

.

in the process of social change there is no such thing as give, onlytake. True or not, by the time 'the community action programs began to

be founded, he had behind him some three decades of- organizing pooror marginal neighborhoods ( white as well as black) and in every in-stance this process had taken tho form of inducing conflict andfighting for power . Was there not something to be learned hereTCouldit be that this is somehow the normal evolution once such an effort-is begun?...Alinsky f s view was nothing, if hot explicit and puhlic:social stabilitydLs a condition reached - through negotiated compromise^betwoen power organizations .- (His origins, of course, are in thetrade' union movomont, specifically the United Mine_Workers). The prob-.lcm of the poor is not only that they Ack money,, but that they lack. . :

power. This means that they have no way of threatening the status quo,

and therefor© that there can be no social change until this .orrnnlz«,

second. Early in the life of the Office of Economic Opportunity,’'* Alinsky was willing to contemplate that Federal funds, bypassing .

“

Qity Hall and channelled directly to indigenous organisations, mightbe used to bring such organizations into bein&'. But his own experienceand practice belied .any such possibility. Throughout his*- career -he ;

had begjin his organizing campaigns with cash in hand, completely inde-/ pendent of the power structure with which he/ wished to feaysffVn* H

. entire, analysis of the process of social chance argued that officialcommunity motion programs would soon fall under the direction ofCity Hall.8

' ’ '

‘

.

-

If, indeed, the purpose of the War on Poverty was to "give” then most of

its Alinsky- like rhetoric about "helping the poor help themselves", and

opening "opportunity" and bringing "hope to all who contemplate their'*

• *

•future in terms of thoir discouraging present" vrent no deeper than the

9'

• - 7™ “ -public relations division. ;

1

.

• • * •- •».•

Minsk’s periodic outbursts about tho hypocrisy of tho War on PoV- .

erty havo providod unforgottable copy-especially his labelling the entirev

effort a "prize place of political pornography. . .a hugo political, pork

barrel, and a 'feeding trough for the welfare industry, surrounded by sanc-10

timonious, -hypocritical, phony, moralistic Sargent Shrive r can-

didly ’challenged Alinsly by declaring that the ’War on Poverty had done "more> 11 • .

for tho Negro in 25 months than Alinsky has in 25 years." Which is pre-

« - *

cisely Alinsky’ s point, for as he replied: "We (tho Industrial Areas Found-

ation) spend $100,000 a year, and Shrivor compares us with tho U.S. Govern-,

• ‘.

•

> t , ,

^ent. Shrivel- soys he's. done more for the Negro than wo haVo. lie’s tolling

t!'.e truth. We’ve never . done anythin? for the Negroes; we’ve worked -.-rLth

12 - •. '

...

them.*’ .... .*

. .

The one poverty war campaign for which Alinsky served as consultant, ;

was. tho short-lived Federal pilot training 'pro gram for organizers at Syra-

cuse University. When the trainees organized slum dwellers against city •

agencies, the city government complained- loudly to 'Washington and the funds

wore withdrawn. • This incident foreshadowed the eventual enactment oE the,, '

/

anondaent to the Economic Opportunity Act passed; in December, 196?, "which f

.* # •

prbvidod that local governments would have the option of bringing their

community action agency under th6ir 'official cintrot. Even with the un- •

• enforceable assurance that ono-third of the representatives on the local

board must bo fpoor” vrith bypass powers given to the director, Ropresen- •

tatlve Edith Green’s (D. Oro.) amendment strengthened the positions'

'pf*

'

.

’•

_I

*

Mayors such as Daley, who already controlled thoir local agency, and 'ef-

fectively moved every other agency under the umbrella of City Hall, The

amendment also opened the way for concerted attacks on the high-risk pro-.

*

grams such as TWO*s. , .

Moynihan roprints Alinsky*s 19&5 prognosis for tho War. on Poverty:• . , « <

'Unless there are drastic changes in direction, rational© and adminis-

v ' '.

tration, the anti-ooverty oro gram may well become the worst political;

‘

15blundor end boomerang of the present administration." Moynihan lays the

blame for. not recognising tho validity of Alinsky’s perspective, on tho .

' administrators of the urogram and tho social scientists who devised the ,

* * i

«s_

- . v

theory of participation without realising the meaning their words would

assume in practice. One of the arguments** in Moynihan* s book is that "social

\ '.

• *

scionde i3 at its weakest, at its worst, when it offers theories of indi-* * " / •

± vidual or coll octa vo behavior which raisos the nossibility, by controlling• 16

certain inputs,.of brinring about mass behavioral change, ** A good point,

! but one that Alincky made eleven years earlier- in a speedk before the Assoc-

iation of'Communi tv Councils in Chicago:

Wo face a danror in'-undua. emphasis' of attention bn;:process,‘;so that .

wb-«ty.well lose sight of’, the purpose. Too much concern with process '

. proaches a point, as is obvious, in a number of parts of this iield, — .f

whereby 'the devotion to process has not only resulted in tho 'loss of k §purpose, but it becomes an academic greenhouse for the nurturing of.

intellectual- seedlings which could never grow in the hard, cold world‘

s AIinsky*s 1965. speech about the War on Poverty went beyond porw ’. t. ;-

vnography and process -into areas where Moynihan tr&xis softly, city hall -

; .*•* '

, ;

w V •

< * o • *

^.

« V-

"patronage and 'welfare - industry -centrism. Before the- Gr£Gn' Amendment

A&lftjriQh a»1»g0Knrttd* ihfli m&mt, city halls> aoting through committee^ ecmwerseA' •^

of the party faithful^ controlled the local antipovorty fund£. Poverty

funds were frequently used to stifle independent action in the name of /

wwiwwttiiy if'pre grans did bypnss city hall tho officials

•

.19

.

'. ; H!

would disown thorn in order to tako themsolvos ’bff the- hook." Another

aspect of tho poverty irar which Alinsky criticised was its ?vast network •'

• 20of sergeants drawing general’s paj*.” Ho illustrated the "startling con-

tra3tn between many salaries beforo and after assuming positions with OED.,

It soems as though - "nowhere in this gr0 at' land of ours is the opportunity- -

’

.

•’'

21

more promising than in the Offico of Economic Opportunity.”

Even more disturbing to Alinsky than £he city hall patrpnago, ,

which is. predictable, is the attitude of professional social workers:

"The" anti-coverty program may well be regarded as history’s greatest ro-• ~ ^

J

' 22 •-

lief program for, the benefits of the welfare industry. rt CThe requirement

of maximum feasible participation raised questions for those institu-,

• ,

tionally involved in aiding the poor. For example, who was to select the

one-third? Tho wc-lfare industry* s vested interests naturally made it

anxious to got n pioce of the now action. Froqueritly the desiro for inu •

vblvo(nent led we1.fa.re professionals into subverting those programs in ,

which they had no part. .

ALinsky concludes his critique by commenting on the crucial question:

lihat can be Mono to make a poverty.-pro gram -functional?

•FiVst, I would have serious doubts .about rotting a poverty jpro- '•

grim to help and work with the poor until" such a time as.tho;poc>r u_, *:

;«v through thoir own organised power would, bd able to provide bona fide

. I«^timato ronr0sentatives of their'interests who„would sit at the; \- - »

- « —.‘ - - * ' •

- " •> » ' 'V

.

•

' programming table ancjfiave a strong voice in both the. formulation.

"and the carrying on of the program. This means an organised poorpossosscd of sufficient power to threaten the states quo with dis-'

. turbing alterations so that it would induco tho status quo tocone through with: a -genuine, docent meaningful poverty program.2^

This is usual Alinslcy talk but, Moynihan not;-dthstanding , there -is

ovidenco that from 3 965. at loast Alinsky's vie^s wore very influential“ I »

;•; ;

within certain circles' of poverty warriors.1

(Thoro is still a good dr-‘

*

rumont that ideas first practiced by Alinsky influcncod the actual wrltingy •

*

•of tho legislation oven though the authors might not have acknowledged* •->

.•*

him). In February, 19^5» 03D issued a Community Action Program Guide'

. /*

-

‘ /

attempting to define the ambiguous participation clause by. strongly urging- "

.

' 25. ,

the involvement of poor people in political action. Tho relluonship —

.

between the Newark riots in tho Summer of 19^7/ and the local poverty

agency which was one of the few in tho country to operate autonomously .

. .

v 26 . .

'

is still a matter pf investigation. A- cartoon in a 1968 VISTA publi-

cation depicts,.an over-coalous VISTA volunteer striking .out at all avail- •

able targots often hitting those, such as Alinsky, who are supposedly

on his sido. (Appendix I)*>

' v.

-* *

• I'

Thez-e is a great lesson in that VISTA cartoon. All too often the ;

War on Poverty with confused intentions and armed with misinterpreted

_? \ .. • ;

•*r - 'iZ

social theory. fulfilled Moynihan* s concluding description of the community

action programs: "...the soaring rhetoric, the minimum performance'; the

feiijne'd constancy, the private betrayal; in the' end*.vthe. sell-out. ,r..

CHAPTER HI FOaTNOTES;

-- •

’. f i

*"t, ttmiftb** '* **

. i x -

;v»t» V..

|

^DanielFree

P. Eoynihan. Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding (New York: The.

*ee Prose, 1963;. .

•

‘ '

•/• , p.

• 3Ibld.. p. 57.* .

<1

4Ibid., p. 8?. ’ v.

%bld . , p.l6l. ^ _ V

5cbid .. p. 188. •

‘

‘

.

2Andrew Kopklnd, "By or For the Poor?” Poverty? Power fund Politics . ed.

Chaim Woxsnan, (New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1968) » P* 226-22?

•

* '•

, * • *

8 .

»*

Moynihan, p. 185-6. v

^National Advisory Council' oh' Economic Opportunity, Report ^of the Council,r Focus on Community Action (Washington, D.C. : The National Advisory.

Council on Economic Opportunity, 1968), p. x.

10

11

Anderson, p. 9^.v

"* «

Astor, p. 3^*

12Ibid..

•

*3john Kifner, "A Professional Radical Rallies the Poor,” The New YorkTimes . January 15, 1967, p. 10E. .

1^lIoynihan, p. 153.

, vl 1

id., p. 187.'

" .

•

"

\l6Ibid. . p. 191.

j* *4 , * •

*?Saul D. Alindcy, ,fFrom Citizen Apathy to Participation," Spoech presentedat the Sixth Annual Fall Conference Association of Community Councilsof Chicago, October 19 > 1957 (The Industrial Areas Foundation:

. Chicago, Illinois), p. 10. '

. * .* - « *

,

•• .

^Saul D. Allnsky, "The War on Poverty—Politick Pornography." Poverty: ,-y .

v:; Power! and Politics, ed.~ Chaim I. Waxman, (New York: Grosset & . ? :'

;i

19

Dunlap, 1963) j p. 173.

Ibid ., p. 175.

20Ibid . ,;

.

t .

^ f ;

»: I

•' •'

•

- ’ -- '

* - .-..v:>Sfj

> 23Ibid . V • :,

•.

- %bld>, p. 177. / /V^\“ ;

'

Carton* "S&fgant Bhrivor and the RoLe of* the PooP, tf Poverty :

• Power and FeXitleo, t>d . Chaitn'I* WrvxMart, (How Yox*ki Qra0«»t.4i • ^Dunlap, 19^3 )', p. 203*

26Ibid., p. 269 .

‘

•.

•

..-

. -

^Moynihan, p, 203 ./"

V.J

I

_ CHAPTER IV -

.'PERSPECTIVES ON ALINSKY AND HIS M)DEL

K '

--ay

Around the edges of Alinsky.' s critiquej>i the War .on Poverty..

- are vestigial reminders that he himself is not blameless. As a model-

builder he is somewhat accountable for even the misguided application

of that model. Thoro-nre also areas of action for which he is more dir- ““r

ectly responsible, so that any evaluation of Alinsky must include both

his accomolishments and his methodology. Beforo discussing either, however,

i '' '

'•

.it is necessary to **ay something about the man himself.- .

-

.1

*

y . -v .

••

.

Ono of the —-v ordinary probloms with the Alinsky model is that

the removal of Alinsky drastically alters its composition* Alinsky is-

‘* .

_ \ .

a born organizer who'».5.-;not easily duplicated, but, in addition to his

skill, he is a nan of exceptional charm. The Economist article, calling

him tho tfPlato oh the Barricades, ,, described it in this-way:

His charm lies in his ability to commit himself completely to the.‘people in the room with him. In a shrewd though subtle way he oftenmanipulates them while speaking directly to their experience. Stillhe is a man totally at ease with himself, mainly because he loveshis work which always seem3 to bo, changing—new communities, newcontests, new fights.l I"

Thus, keeping in mind the difficulties that tho loss-than-charming en-i •

' ... •

counter in their organizing attempts, lot us . evaluate method and method-.,

ology referring to the three case studies investigated.

Although the long-term effectiveness of Alinsky! s organizing ef-,

• ' — » -t

- 4 % '•;!•'

’ " - <*':;? ' -,%>:•••. :

' *

forts cannot yet be assessed, the Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council

is -^ .well-established cofnmUhity organization. As previously: noted, the .y* '’

Council? s democratic enthusiasm .has yielded, to . chauvinistic, defensLvenessr-f

v&y*

J

;-Ar

- V*. ‘ V

>:Randcraly selected issues of the Back of the Yards'Journal illustrate

<: ’, i 0 ,

’

... '

_

the self-centered smugness of a neighborhood with political influence#:

‘ *> -

_

*_ r

^ • ,.

0• 1 *. *. -f':

‘

•'•-wl.,..,w

The Journal*

s

pages are filled with progress reports .about. area,im-*,*:.. -

^'<v: .

«(6~ ’•

-i v,":

\~’nvK

provements sponsored jointly by the Council -and^ity Hall. The.Councils;

Executive Secretary, once Alinsky* s fellow-radical, has held his position/

for over twenty-five years. and, if the neighborhood floes .not .•"change”

(i.£# integrate) he could hold it for another twenty-five. Change is the' v-

..

•'/ «• /.'v/ ‘

key to the situation, in Back of the Yards today just as it was in'-'1939V. , \

v \only now the residents are the status quo . When, a community is organ-'

‘

.

••

'*» - i

’

isod around the conoopt. of «.*» Dnok of -fcha Yards? and othoV ^.

y t « i.• • -

'' >#' ,! ..

Alinskyiorganicod areas have been, it is natural that self-interest rd—•'//'/

mains the theme of that community* s cohesion.’ The Council/has through th6**"J'.

years helped to superimpose on idbntity upon the area. John Haffner, who, .

•has worked for the Journal since it began, renumbers the old .’jungle" and2 ;

v: _• , ,/ v

"is proud "that few residents -move from- Back -of-the Yards#- The -1 ack-of ;— •

mobility amongBthe residents is often cited as a criticism of Alinsky.

for "nailing down" the neighborhood.'

This criticism has been appliedJj\ a slightly altered, form to

Woodlawn. Philip M. Hauser, head of the Department of Sociolo£y at the

f . .

• - •’ f

'

’’

‘:•

University of Chicago, believes that "Cwie methods by which Alinsky organ-t

‘ V t,

- *'••••

iued TWO may actually have impeded the achievement of consensus and thus .

.. • . - 4 /

’

'

, % .

• ••

dolayod the attaining of Woodlavn’sptrue objectives." Even questioning <

:

\ /- - \

;

'

,

'' '

whether Professor Hauser knows what"''those "true «objoctives" are, his com- ;;y

merit is suggestive of other academic'criticism of thb^Alinsky model *

s

results. ,

iS '4

? X: ^ .*•

i ., i;

fi... . . . i . .

-*• '.

. ,J..' ^ v.* •' 7 -V ?l***W~ A

'ft' I '

,

‘ ‘ S-. ' *'*/-*>

Dr. HaroldvFey, editor of Chri stian Century^ and Dr• Frank-R^issman/> ;|

r

*th'e Nr~.r y^rk Tnrtitifte for* Developmental Studios are two othorioutspoken

: L't ’

• . : it* "! 1 ••

’

•

t,. yt»! -v •

; £.

' i*4

,

*

n » * 3^.'; , vt \*i. >“

T critics* Dr* Fey* s objections center on Minsky* s abrasive manner and*

,”

- • ''

! » »'

.

..

•>« , • - \

avowed intention to . alter the -existing balance of social' power* He has,

’

- charged AlinSky with Encouraging "a ‘political movement whose object'is T .

/ti ' establish control over urban society by raising up from its ruins a"

•power structure* dictatorship based bn slum dwellers J* Such amorphous

hysteria is characteristic of Dr. Foy. Dr. Reissman, however, presents

a formidable critiquo^in his article "The Myth of Saul, Minsky." He

incorporates a epcctfum of objections the most important of which’ bon- . T Vy,.

:

corns .Alinsky* s apparent inability to movo toward anything in the way V; '

• ;•

’

".

' 7"

. of developing a movement or a national pro cram or national organization*, y .

'•

’- * • # i .

* ‘ \d-;-» ,

*_

. J V

"-

Jv‘

Roissman constructs his critiquo around Alindky*s emphasis on lo-' .

calism and the results of that localism which Reissman considers ineffoe-•

, ..

’ c «>

tivo* He uses an estimato mad© by*. Nicholas von Hoffman that only 2$ of a .

cormmnity are evor activated- in any IAF organizing drive^ to ..demonstrate

sthe non-representative nature of the mobilization* Tho point is valid but"

of little significance since in any organization tjie loaders are among

tho most active membors/and doolsion-making necessarily excludes some

elements at times. A more critical question, which Reissman oriy implies•

involves the long-range effectiveness of recruitod loaders* The only

visible national firuro to emerge from'an IAF endeavor is Caesar Chavez

who began as rjv organizer* _ Reissman has a bettor argument when he moves

from tho internal structure of the local- organizations to their activities*

. Tho 'question, as- Reissman phrases it, is whether Allnsky politi- .

* cizeslan affea -'or . simply directs ^people into a kind of> dead-end iocal.

.activism? u

- Reissman answers his own question by focusing on Chicago'

*'T; f

where the most publicized of Alinsky*s efforts have taken place* They •'

w• #£,

T

>. ^ -

.*

'.•/ '* 'yr!'YC: 'J .

4 -V4 ’

'; { -

-/ --

• -*

•_

/ * ”' •*• 1

'

; V- 9: - vvIP1,

- have not for. all' their noiso shaken the hold of tho Dalov machino. ...Per--,- '

. --

,

'• •; . .v,,. *j\*‘

" iT haps/ tho Alinsky model’s emphasis on local issues airchgoais determined- i.;. : '

/ : .

4O+***0 mnov&H** -from, wider -or eoai±t±orf v*^*m*t*

postulates that Alinsky’s opposition to largo/programs, broad goals, and •

ideology confuses even those who participate in the local organizations f

because they find no context for their actions.t

*

~ Yet, Reissnan’s proposed solution dopends oh the "organizer-strat-. 1

egist-intollectual" to "provide the connections, the largor view that 'Hill’ .10 • •

: '••

. .vU --ii

load to the development of a movement." Almost as an afterthought ho ,

'

-’

,- •

,

• V .

J

•*• ,

*• *'•»*'* '

adds! "This is not to suggest th^t the largor view should be imposed, upon •

'

* ‘S'"v ?. •

the local group; yot, it should bo developed, in part, by nationelly-

.

••

^11- ‘

.

• — •.‘

•;.* ./ ;

oriented leadership." This position is accepted by some New Left' fetratfcgls

,V v .

*. \

’

:

=

:

:

' If-who, although dlcenchantod with Alinsky-liko faith in individual s

,' apply

'

* ...

'

, - .

many of his tactics in confrontation politics. The problems inherent-in /» *

•' .'

U - .: .

* :

.{J

such an. approach/including elitist arrogance and repressive intolerance 4

* "* 4 '

*» 4^-

. have become evident during recent university crises. The engineers of

disruption, lacking Alinsky* s flexibility in dealing with their "enemy"

(i.e. administrators, trustees, etc. become hardened into non-negotiable

situations. Conflicts then run the possibility of osoalating into zero- ’ \’ '

'

‘

-I• -

.

/, . sum' gamos whoro nobody wins. Although Alinsky publicly dismissed the ;

. .- \ - •'**«.

Reissman critique in 1967 jhe began developing a coherent radical strategy* :

to deal i;ith the tronds of^the 1970*'s.

^ Underlying criticism such as Hauser* s and Reissmah^s is the debate’ey*

tho merits of consensus and conflict both -as a means for undorstandingV; -•

social processes and for achieving social goal's. Alinsky,- ;tho exemplaiy^ -

.conflict advocate, dismisses the consensus theorists: .

I. <crt

k;

- * One thing we instill in all our organizers is that old

;' Snanish Civil '/7ar slogan: ‘Better to *die on your feet... •;

.

-•

.

s *" «0 W hft?6 8i' Social scrlentirsts dort’trv - v

.*,

like td. think in those terms. They would rath»r talk **

‘

. ;

> -about politics being a matter of accommodation, consensus—:

-

and not this conflict business. This' is academic 'drivel. \

How do you have consensus before you have conflict? ' There *•'•

has to be a rearrangement of cower and then you get con- .* „

'Cy *k- senSU5. i2 "y

‘ - /'

•JJ-

.

•

.

;

As with most of Alinsky’s political analyses there is a convincing

ring to this one; however, "reality”, which /dinsky champions, is "

hot so facilely analysed. >

... - The* juxtaposition of. consensus and conflict, has been a rWtter "sU

of dispute among social scientists sinoo Plato.. For our purposes '

V -wo can join the debate during the 19,50’ s, presupposing all that*-” \ •

/vent before. During the 1950’s the conflict theorists such as-‘

1

* - . t

-

• . . .' f *

-*:

' •'

v

V.'.

*'

• • '

, Levis Cosor followed up; the work of non such as Georg Simmol in-

order to challenge the prevailing consensus orientation. Exem-, .

-

plifying thi-S consensus orientation was Seymour Martin Lipset who

writes in Poli tical Man :• •

• ..

Inherent in all democratic systems is thC constant threat'..that. the grouo conflicts which are democracy’s lifo-blood may .

solidify to the point >ih'o re :r. they throaten:to disintegratesthe

society. Honce. conditions which serve /.to moderate thelintcn- -

feity of partisan .battle are among* the key requisites of-.demo- * .' v

. era-tic- government. *3 . . . . v

v

Lipset* s .statement, more functionallyfare scrlotive than societally •

descriptive, is indicative of othor consensus thinkers such a§ ' .11 |

.

-- Luvey or PoTsons. For them,

.cwrXlict is incompatible /with. struc-- ‘5 *

'. tura, and organisation -is- dependent on a consensus -essential to /

“ "- '

^ ^5

;..

' / • _,

.* '

- #< ;v: .// - t l*''•* '’i''- ^ Til •/ -

r*. • *

.

.

* .

* .V .-’5—* **V

*

>**•

yil-bocial C-vuilifcriujn. - : Irving Louis Hdrowits in . his? article . ’’Consensus, |

'/Conflict-, 'and Co-o doration" • sugge

i

'-V fogI • i

.1

...>¥ J

.•""'C

'.TV

Y»;>- ’ during the 1950* s perceived -an increasihg^democrntization .of Amor-; :

'.'

^,. t. • ,

,_,'. ’

•

)•'*'f'rr

' lean sociotythat orecioitated their search for a consensual’ basis• -

;

‘ 14 V '*

,

’

'

*f. .

‘ weefrwtr*/** Certsettntt* **i*»a«• >U ^ c[ev~\ u I'tr, d H-v* a-fo utrtX £ O C- ( € tu * ^ S <-A 5 c <T v"\ ^ < ci *

•mental to the nanagoriil state in which mass oorsuasidn ts more.

.15 :

• -. .. .

.

;•; r

4

:; • •

effective than mass terror.y \

'

:.:.• •

*’

. i *

-••Coser’s challenge to the consensual judgment that cortfliot is* " «4

’'

dysfunctional is particularly effective because of distinctions• * *

*. t .

he makes among, conflicts . Tho most obvious distinction's internal

and external conflict. Because Minsky 1 s concern centers on ihter-*i

* *» - .

group conflicts rather than intra-group ones, these remarks Will be

limited to. the former typos. ’ ^,c ‘ •'**' The di.HTcrd.mln^t,i.ng morinor in which Cosor hnndtos inter- group

.* *

•

conflicts can be seen in the following-excerpts from the conclusion

.vof Tho Functions of Social Conflict:

.In loosely structured groups and open societies, conflict,: ~

which aims at a resolution of tension between antagonists,^'. .

..

is likply to have stabilising and integrative functions forthe rel ationshio. By Dermitting immediate and direct ex-

•

.pression .of. rival- claims,

.suchAsocial'- systems are able to;

readjust their structures by eliminating tho sources ofdissatisfaction... ’

.......

A flexible society benefits from. conflict because such .

~

behavior, by helping to create «Arid modify norms, assures,

its continuance under changed conditions... -•"

Since the outbreak of the conflict indicates arejec-* tion of a provious accommodation between parties, once the . ;

respectivo power of the contenders has been ascertainedr through conflict, a new equilibrium can be establishedand the relationship can proceed on this new basis...

Assuming that American society is '’open” the._implication 'of • the above'

analysis' applied to conflict in this country is that such conflict -V. .•

1 _. % - 1 t \c /' :./; ~

. . •

."-1* ", *i

''

**’

•

’ 4 .. .’

i s V .*;

3 . ‘i • I - vl-

* is stabilizing. Thero is, hovxo'vhr,- a necessary. Qualification tb-.be/fv; •

_.

: , - - -*.

."

. ,

'

; made regarding "realistic” and "nonrealistic" conflict: '•-

i

: */' *• &ocial .conflicts • .that arise from frustrations of spe-v

:

*\

•

'f cific .demands within a relationship and from estimates of' gains' of the participants, and- that nr© directed. at the pre-

‘- ;suaied frustrating 'object, can bo called realistic conflicts,

• -Insofar as^they. are moan's toward specific results, .they, canbe replacod-by alternative modes- of interaction with the r

:—contending party if such alternatives seem. to be more ade-

quate, for. realizing the end in view, J ~ -7•*’

; ,7 Nonrealistlc, cbnflicts, on the other'nand, are not.

'“ occasioned by thb rival ends of the antagonists, but by

•.7 the hoed for tension release of one or both of them. In •

. this care the 'Conflict is not oriented toward tho attain-ment ’of specific, results. Insofar as unrealistic conflictis an end in itself, insofar as it affords only, tension

'release,' the chosen antagonist can be substituted for by ’

any other suitable target. 1?

,There is, then, no direct relation between stabilisation and conflict

:

* .

*

:

' 7 •

/4

'

* -' -

. , _

per - se but between stabilisation and certain types of conflict, This'v ‘

.

'' ' • *• *

v. , t

-conclusion is essential for our understanding of Alinsky*s use of

conflict,_

.'-7-

••• Although, the People *s Organizations onco established engage -

•f- 77 •.7-;

;7 . 7 ' 18 • v

;

- .

more often in realistic than nonrodlistic conflicts, thoir forma-

tion is largely a process of exploiting nonrealistic conflict. It

is during, this. process that Alinsky*s critics acctfse him of "rubbing

raw the sores of discontent" - without any specific goal in mind. 77

Alinsky views the process as having soVeral ends-among which: is the

public, firing' of .grievances:

• The very action of • elevating those dormant hidden hostilitiesto /the surface for confrontation and ventilation and conver-

• .sion/into. problems is. in itself a constructive and most impor-•y

: ../tarit social catharsis. - The alternative would be .'the. permitting

7-'

xofyIncessant accuraulation ;and compounding. of submerged fnis- “

.

77:7 trations7 i reseptroents and hostilities. iri large' sepoents of-

l•

* .*,*!•> * .-*

-*-* v~~.trv % ,

I-',.

«HV 7 «» . -’a'i'"* r,-

* 1-

; f 4 &/ i

-fife /73£r• •4^ ;.^\vr -I f.;-

* "j/ ' -‘

’

,

”

rh'-. ,,’*•«»

i..'.•

.^;t

__ * ^ \'77 ~ —i i* %***-» * V . T' ‘

" 7 ;. •4 '

'•, • •«''7 ." '*! *

ALinsky’s conclusion that the "ventilation” tff hostilities is. healthy“

>{ ,•

' - '• ’*

4 ^ « ;

-«'•,. ','

.

••.*'.

•

,

=. ^ - • • • ‘.

/ in certain situations is valid, but across-the-board "social catharsis”

cannot be prescribed, * Catharsis has a way of perpetuating itself_ j _•

so that it becomes an ond in. itself, Alinsky’s psychodraraatlcs* havef

-.^brought him- attention and- catalyzed organizational activity, but • • - .-i7:,,

many sociologists, such as Professor 'Annemarle Shimony of Wellesley’

20: ,7*

College, regard Alinsky as a showman rather than an activist, -

7”

•. .

*"‘

. . 1'•• -

-'

4

•> 7 4

1 Professor Shimony considers both Back of. the Yards and Woodlavm 7

failures; the former because of its segregationist tendencies^ which >77-

aro t articular hostilities publicly expressed, and the latter because

of itj; takoovnr by gangs, who opitomizo a blatant hostility approaefh.

Another criticism of Alinsky’ s catharsis approach is' the difficulty *’

in ap - lying it, Alin sky, the master shopman, is ablo to orchestrate 7-

it, but other loss-skilled organisers, such as the Reverend Hr, Fry,

. cannot naintaiA. control. M^ny of the Alinsky-inspired poverty warriors •• J:

•-' could- not- (discounting political reasons) move beyond, the cathartic ’

;

•first 'step of .organising groups "to oppose, complain, demonstrate,^

'

• 21 '

and boycott” to dovoloping and running a program. Coupled' to the.

'

.'

problem of conflict is the question of what are the results of roal- .

v7* * S

’ 4:

' '

'i Stic conflict?- -fho answer in Co3er’s words is "the maintenance ,

'

*r

, * ;• -

-

:

— •• .•- 22 '

.

•-

;

or continual readjustment of the balance of ’x>wer. ” And power, •' ^ •

from white to bl.-ek,- is Alinsky* s language • . . - *•;

**

, . •

.

*

Recently the language of power has become mo re .familiar amonfe ,*

“social analysts.

who have finally arrived at Alinsky’s .(939 conclusion

.Lthat the problems of the poor are more directly related;to-their ' .7 . ..

- - - -'‘.*7« .':7''p v . • v|.j'**/ *' ' ^ *’ v

''si'jSV'’

of 'poTTOr.--th»h‘- to- their*' lack;-of money, The book, Povortyg Pokrer

* .

>' ' 'A 1 '

i' —-&jj

|y ^^ "'"lT*-’''*‘ T1*'

''t*‘

:

,•r • ”v- ••,... /; :

v.,'> ;i;

114

.... • i » ' -’ ' »»_--!''- »- - '••.:.'*»-< I1,

j,-!-

'

.-. ‘*t t5k. '•.^-.'I » '?

neatly colonir.es the ’’new” povror approach to -the problem of self-, w.help. More Accurately the problem is not one of ’’power 1’ but of -

* -i* 4 - “

. , .•

’’povmrtessness.” . .*

Warron C. Knc^strom in hia essay on "t,he,-Powor of the poor"’

* summarises the approach to the problem of poverty based on the psycho-V •

^. 4

logy of poworlessnoss; • •

If the problem were only one of a lack of mone}', it could - l

be solvod' through provision of more and hetter paying jobs .

’

for the poor, incroasod minimum wago lovels, higher levels of .

welfaro payments, and so on. There would bo, in that case,. .

no real nerd for the poor to undertake any social action ontheir own behalf . This view is' consistent with the idea thattho poor arc ‘unable to participate in and initiate the solutionof their own problems. vr •.

Howover, since it is moro likely that the problem is oneof pOvrerl'essness, joint initiative by tho poor on their ownbehalf should nrocedo and accompany responses from the remain-der of society. In.joractico this initiative is likely to be .

most effectively exercised by powerful conflict organizationsbased in neighborhoods of poverty, *-3

These paragraphs, originally written ^in aro included in a 19&8 -

collection .with other ore scriotive treatises, urging similar solutions 3 v

to social nroblens—which are now out-of-date.

Ono of the people v;ho now recognizes the anachronistic nature • .

of small autonomous conflict organizations is Alinsky himself. A J ;

critique of tho power/cbnflict modol for community organization •

in. 1969 can no longer bo a critique. of the Alinsky-method because v „

’

that- method has undergone a significant evolution -since its coales-

cence in 1939. Those who build models frequently leave their obsoles-* •

* i . . ;.. V ...' i - .. ^

i 4-VJ

cent ruins behind them for others to play with while they begin

building- anew. * Al-insky* s evol utlori within the context of .the last A

thirty years. places in relief America’s great challenge:.tho search.'-;-^, i_

AVA

5

'."V

'

•

.r + pg ,

-» ^Cr-w >v >'t_jaMP^V-4w

- ••*

.:

<•'

‘ ,•';

.j f -

.... ** *.V*£w^

‘—..-~ um:-—

—

4— V «*&s-w '* :;-?- -.: *,J

: . j -fora.viable c»$niunity. Before discussing this search and AlinskyJfs:;\

. -

'

'"C_

-~ '-''

' ' '..'*

_

'’ " J " .T

role ir» iti the obsolescence .of the ^vor/cortfllct- model will-Se'f .

explored.

A ^primary reason for the obsol escence of the power/con£liot;

model is that the unit to which it .applies, he territorially-

• ,•

> dofined community, is no longer a workable societal unit. The

decline of tho neighborhood has been occurring since the turn of

'the century, slowirfg somewhat during tho Depression then accelerating• # ,

after the 1 war. Accompanying the decline of the traditional neighbor-

hood as a living unit were the massive centralisation of no’rr on

the federal level and the growth of the suburbs, Federal central-* *

* „'#

. .’

«

ization reduced local and state power^, while mushrooming suburbs -y

.

»

resulted in a form of power schizophrenia in which the urban areas

remained the centers of business and culture only at the morcy of

comauters. Thus, .we find ourselves in the middle of ah urban crisis* • •

. .- -i

which is . really a crisis of community power*. Kenneth “Boulding views

the problem .in the perspective of the international ' system and sees:

The crur of the problem is that we ennnot have communityunless -

wo lwve an aggregate of people with some decision-making rower. The impotence of^the city, perhans its very

•• inappropriatenoss .as a unit is leading to its decay., Its •

impotence* arises, ns'-I* have suggested cdrlJLor, because *it<6 is becorin p ? mero p->wn in economic, nolitlcal , ,and military

decidion-m-iking, . The outlying suburb is actually in. a'

better share. It is easior for a relatively small urit to

have some sense of community, and the suburb at- least has a

littl.o no re control over its own destiny. ..Its local ..govern-ment, its school board, and other community agencies oftenarc able to gather.a considerable amqpnt of support and

,interest from the peopl’e they serve. ^ ^ '

/•-’,

*

Boulding* z observations might; bo used.by a modorn coriflictAl ';

l; theorist.,argoing in favor of Haggstroni's advocacy of conflict prgan—*.• A

izations in poverty areas. If , he might arguo, an aggregate is impotent

then there is need for arousing tho Individuals in : that aggregate to ex-, ;

...W ‘ •"

~ft '_

'

!, \ +:”* ' • . \ f -? ?

"•'

. s.:“-

orcise their citizenry power. The- next question then becomes,' against ’ ~

whom would the conflict be directed? Traditionally the power/conflict

.model was applied in urban communities in ordor to organize against some!

thing: meat packers, the University of Chicago, Kodak. The complicated

overlapping 'layers comprising our interdependent urban , areas today, makes ;i_

it 'difficult to single out an "enemy." One of the factors contributing to-. • .

*•»

the Ocoan Hill-Brownsville school controversy in Now York during the Fall• •

of 1963 was tho marked absence of an identifiable enemy. The target .

shifted .from tho toachor* s union to the School Board to the state to.

1

• ‘ 1

tho Ford Foundation and around again. The lack of a clear-cut enemy against• - *

’

whom to mobilise underscored tho labk of a community oapablo of mobil-

ization.

Yet, perhaps, the conflict theorist might continue his, argument

by suggestingjkhat tho problem is not in tho modol but-in those applying

it. With tho "right" organizers, such as Alinsky, would it not bo possible. .

• r“ -.

’•

to organize a community .utilizing conflic^, and participation? A possible

\ . • . • ,’ *

reply recalls the FIGHT effort in Rochostor. Many critics of Alinsky's r

. ,

- ^ ^25work there believe that.tho end result is merely a "bettor ghetto."

/ 1*

V N .

' ' ' * • * >

Alinsky himsoif ±3 unhappy about tho mostly symbolic function whioh FIGHT•

. 26 • • : •

has assumed in the community. Given the components of FIGHT, however,

is there anything more to be expected? Tho conditions of 'slum-bound blacks

in our Northern cities is onmonshod in what the Kemer Commission re- .

ferred to as "institutional racism." One does not ‘practice the fine art

of gadfly conflict against the overwhelming odds suggested by the Commission:

....,

.•. ,

V, -

and Boulding. .. _ -

‘

.

>;• -

• .... ./ '

r?f

.• 7~ Interestingly, this society seems”to be in a transitiorT period,

1

•caught between conflict, and consensus. The closest parallel might be the

71930's when a changing, but still coherent .consensus, withstood the as«—7

eaniits of outcast groups# $he position of labofr is the analogy frequently

cited to justify the power/conflict model. Although labor fomented con-

flict, its goal was always a share of the American Dream, The lack of '

radicalism in the American labor movement should not surprise anyone

• .'

* i ~ '

who studies the effect that this country’s phenomenal growth had 6n* • * • ", ~r

forming the ethos and expectations of the people, .

v.-;

• *

In Coser’s terms. the labor conflicts were realistic and eventually/ -

accommodated beca^uo institutions were flexible. During the. years since‘

/ • .•

• r" .

•- • *

World War II, our institutions have bocoma, less flexible under their

managerial weight, and the conflicts less realistic. Men still want jobs.

but they now demand "meaning" in the jobs they receive. Just because such

a demand would have been ludicrous in the Jobless thirties the analogy

with that era cannot bo drawn too closely, ^ •'

4 Being in the middle of a transition obscures one’s ability to

• assess it. Elements taken for granted«4n the power/conflict model of the ,

H 7

late 1950’s 'and early 1960*s must be newly considered. One such element

is the role of participation. The power/conflict model assumed that par-

ticipation, as the root of the -democratic, process* was a necessary* and •

good'- thing. 'Today, nothing is so certain as we wonder.; just what it is we

; are participating'.!!!. With convincing eloquence -Jd|an Gardner has argued:

;•• ' »-J.

*•/ ,*

Gardner has argued

that the United States has evolved; into a society operating on.the "bee- -A.

hive model." that locks:individuals into tasks that seem isolated and mean-

. . 27 ..-7 t •; •

"

t’:

.*

.* V

ingles a.- -The danger of this, Gainer warns, Is thaf.’fmen and women ' tafcght

:

'

.

’

v.:

:V'’

: '* : ..

* *Mi •

! /, .7 > ' A '- * ’ / .

to cherish a set of - values and" then trapped in. a systeft that negates those,

T'.^T**%‘*

"1 =>- i ?**Hi*fr 28’.•:r7\

- W *

•

^ t ^ L

^t_. 4 ^ . .. .. , v- . V 1 'jj*

values may react with angexi and -even violence

•

tt It is doubtful" whether:

the tired cry7for participation offers’ a solution* for, as'Gardner says,ilfe.

•*' .;•* • r — .V:,,.;,-

it is not so obvious that "the urge to particioate actively in.the shaping" : • - "of one*s social institutions is a powerful h^Aan. motive.!l

• Xn addition to the uncertainty of its two fundamental assumptions,

Community, and participation, the, power/conflict model is rendered inapplic-

able by existing societal conflicts. The primary visible conflict today

is racial with most of our urban problems having racial aspects. Any at-

tempt to specify a conflict cannot help but touch on tho larger issuesi * *

*

of racism and segregation. Once those issues are raised settlement bo-

cohes increasingly difficult as illustratod in^ Roger Fisher’s work on30 •

.

' v

.

wfractionatin g conflict." Fisher’s salami-slicing taoties for dealing \

with conflict along with Amitai Etzioni’s suggestion that appropriate

bribes be offerod ore two thoorotical modifications of the* poWer/conflict

.model that warrant practical testing. Yet, as our "two societies" move -

further apart cont2*ivcd conflict serves to exacerbate the polarization.V

Horowitz labels the dement needed during this transition ’'cooperation" •-

Q •V’ :

. 31'

'

,' '

•

.:

and Alinsky would. agree. ^

The search for community and tho feeling of powerlessnoss charac- .

• * . * **

'

.

*•

terlse the entire society, not just tho poor at whom the powor/conflict.

': » '

••

, *.

" \ / .

model was originally aimed. Alinsky' s realizations that the fight { .

against reaction continues in Back of the Yards,; .that TNDJs conflict ^ or-

ientation backfired; and that FIGHT needed its proxy-votihg fiends-

?,

signalled* -his rethinking the idea of community and devidng new strategics

.to iichievo democratic equality. -

kVV

• •

'

*. CHAPTER' XV FOOTROTSS: h

• r;*‘

• 5 ,\ ~ • j - • .? Ji* . s.‘* *•. •

. * * *<V :'•.

•;'i &v v??.;

'

*"Plato '_ on the Barricades,’" p. 14.'* ’ •*

"~~~4,.- . . .

'•• ••**••'• - • •

.- V . \.

..

J' John Hajffner, Reporter on the Back of the Yards Journal . private interview

,in Chicago, Illinois, January, 19^9*

~~7 1

•^Bruckner, p. 01. .’ /

u, .-

• •’

••;'; ~'v~\7 ~~T

. Andorson, p. 102. s. .

.’ ••• ./-j

%bld . ; .. ....'

%rank Rcdssman, "The Myth of Saul /Minsky, " Dissent (July-August, 1967)*%.^'

7Ibid .; p. 4?4.

8Ibld ., p.>75.

‘

9rbid., p. 473 : -

"i

10Ibid . , p. 474.

11Ibid . .

V

"‘

. \j O “

^Andorson, p. 102.

^Seynour Martin Lipset, Political Man (Gardon City, New York: Doubleday andCo;, Inc,, 1959), p. 70-1.. > r- —

14 • . . .* ---— =-- —

Irving Louis Horowitz, "Concensus, Conflict, and Co-operation," System ,.

Change, and Conflict ^ od. N.J. Denerath III ai'.d Richard A. Peterson.(New York: The Free Press, 19^7), p» 265. - •

1^Tbid. 0 p.. 276-77.

^?

- 1 eh 4 cC

*For a confliclin r opinion see: Thomas D. Sherrard and Richard C. Murray,"The Church and Neighborhood Community Organization," Social Work ,

(July, 1965), n. 3-14.

Alinsky, "Citizen Participation and Community Organization in -Planning -f .

and "Urban Renewal ," p. . 13 •

20 ,

'

Anncraarie. Shiaiony, Professor of Sociology at Wellesley College, private .:

-•*interview in :-7cllesloy, Massachusetts, March, i969»

-

•• •

' **

hMMi: 1% 1st

^National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, Report of the Commission,' Report of the National Advisory -Commission oh Civil. Disorder*? ; vv

'(New York:. Bantam" Books, 1968), p, 29?.' ’ ’

pp -, - ^ ... ,;,y v

Cosery p. 156* **,

*• •

' 4 *

• ^^Warron C. Haggstrom, "Tho Power of the Poor, 'VPovorty: Power and Polltlos ,

od. Chain I • Waxnan (Nev; York: Grossot'A Danlap, I968)', p.l^* 7"*"*

• * •*•

pit • *

Konneth Bouldin?, "The City, as an Element in tho International System," >

Dacdulus, '(Fall, 1968), p. 1118.

25"

'

'

"Anderson, p. 102. '*

p4 .

'

.

*

* Alinsky interview, Wollesl.ey, ‘»•

^Richard E. Edmonds, ’’Gardner Urges. U. S.jRevivc Participation," The Harvard

.

Crimson . March 27, 1969, -P* !•'

^Ihid.

^Ibld .. p. 3.

-^^Rogor Fisher,- ."Fractionating Conflict," International Conflict and Behav-ioral Science , ed. Roger Wisher (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 196^),

p. 91-110.

31-

Horowitz. ' j..

.ftv-c; .

..'

..1

. '.T.,

.- '

. . . 1.

'.

‘w " , »>... ‘ V ...... .

* j-V- ' / * • .. •

- /• ...-

'

. V *'

'J

'

“ rrr:• ’

- •' r .

; "

v ........ — CHAPTER V

mm

*5. ^ ’

' :'?*.

. 'virX^C:

REALIZING LIFE AFTER -BIRTH . -.

q.'

.

The previous chapter_was a .."perspective" rather than a "critique";•

•.

‘<.

becausb both Alinsky and his model are continuing to evolve. Although» .

* • . .*

\

his basic premises, such as the primacy of power' and the unavoidabHity

of a relative morality are unchanged, his approach to tho problem of

^redistributing poorer has ; shifted since his days as a labor organizer.

These shifts aro not oasily categorlzod, but they fall into two broad'

t •;;

areas; his rethinking tho meaning of community and tho rolo of central-*

ized national planning in "social chan go.* • . • ,

Central to Alinsky' s evolving socio/political philosophy is hlsq

..

* v *

rethinking tho idea of comunity:

• I do not think the idoa of geographical areas, especially ofneighborhoods, is any longer applicable. A long time ago, probablywith tho advent of tho car, wo came to the -end of the definable.aroa. Peoplo no longer bfeally live their livos in neighborhoods 0

Wo have political subdivisions which are things out of the-past,linos on the maps; wo arfe still involved. with this idea. But thelife of the peoplo is something olso. We aro going to have to findout where it really is and how to organize it."l -r

-When Alinsky talks about finding "iV* he is teliding about the content

* A- . * :

of life in a mass civilization. The* inquiry is roall.y .a two-part ones/

- f •t

' ~ ’

Why, since industrial man found tho "good life" does he^seom to. have lost

himself, and where do ire ro from here? For Alinsky, the two are connected4

. f

with tho nodorr* search for community._

• f'

‘

..

In his rnocch, "Is There Life’ After Birth?", presented before V;;y:

the Episcopal Theological Seminary in 19&7, Alinsky deals with both

parts of tho question. Echoing tho dire predictions of Ortega y Gasset

about the stifling effects resulting from a climate of • confonnity and•

.•

. _

'. : ' „•

. >>'

* 'S'-

: I;•V«~

I

^ • 7.V,

AV-' "* $*V •

\7*' -'i ’ *•;*•. ' „< "*7' "• 7 • *y -’•'*

A•

. --- nt _

consensus, .Alinsky concludes that what is at stake is our- individuals.SS.

':#.r3and.collective sanity. . TJriiike the philosopher or artistj- he looks -for;*.-

**•, :~*?r -. ~ - ' ' '

•

.

• ' * -.

i'.. :

’l.,* „* w ..... *

salvation in the political system. • . • -V

:fhe central problem - in the late* twentieth/ centhry .according to •

Alinsky is the

*• *,

maintenance and development-, of that, pollteal mechanism whichcarries the best, promise for a way of life that would enableindividuals to secure thoir identity, have the opportunity to

{jrow and achieve being as free men in fact, non- willing to. makedecisions and, bear their consequents.

4

Hero, in a very world-oriented way, is the modem man’ attempting to

live in the world-as-it-is. Alinsky continues: .

'

•

Host people have been and are foarful to pay this pxice for free-dom, and so freedom has largely boon freedom to avoid these re-sponsibilities. The free man is one who would break loose from :,

the terrestial, chronological existence of security and statusand tako off into the adventurb which is life with its passions,drama, risks, dangers, oroative joys, and the ability to changewith change.

5

In response to a question about* his personal philosophy; Alinsky,

cringing at the use of labels, ruefully admitted that he might be- ' 6

,*

,

* /called an ’'existentialist. ” *

' Yet, as Alinsky has warned before words can get in -the way,* • *

- „

©Specially when discussing tho route to -such a political mechanism as'

f

~~“<-

he outlines. Alinsky. simplifies tho matter by concentrating on the

•actualization of traditional democratic ideals; Ho advocates belief

in man's ability to govern himself 'and the importance of voluntarism

in a free socioty. These are- old ideas, old for .Western man' and old

ifor-Alinsky,- but he injects them into, a revised model emphasizing-

middle- cl ass organizing and coalition, building.

I

Alinsky* s pascription for the poor, helping themselves was to

'motivate the powerless to acquire the necessary skills and knowledge ’ .v">.

r, .

..-

, ....... .

' ^ .

wJt;' l 4*, : i’i*.* •*.; • .• - -r-* '- .

<)-• -•>•*- ik—

v

i'.artrit •' lAifl 1

^ ’ ~ ?. -*'•: » >

*. . »

.

."%'* - •.* *!*{%• • ’''•* i-t *V*' ^!•"*

to control their own affairs. His belief that the poor can translate* • j.. l.J.

'

. -tf 'f;. • • • * > * ,***-*• •

>•••**-. >;

apathy into power .and then use that power responsibly has, in some 4. • v .

• •* V' • '4• ,

’ ' * 1^

cases, proven true. In others the transition has been dysfunctional .1•

^

'% . %

* ,*4

.

• \<y

'' "-ei-ther-for^the community or for the cause of radical change,-Often-“ :-“-

the ' application of the Alinsky model In geographically-bound lower-'

class areas assumes an almost bootstrap formula which is too conserva-v.

.

tive for our present situation.-

*"v « ,

' '

A People’s Organization of local organizations can at best ,

create" n err levels of harmony among its membors and secure a few material

gains. It is not oriented toward harmonizing competing metropolitan in- .*{

•

* , **

torests in a concert of governmental restructuring. Part of the reason .

•

'

.**• ,

why it is so ill-cquippod is the lack of vision Reissman mentioned.» , *

Attempts at articulating vision lod Alinsky away from the jungles and

ghettoes to the suburbs^ bocauso it is futile to discuss ”visionn vith^

a nan not yet materially sated or frightoned of losing the proporty he

possesses. As Alinslcy learned during the FIGIIT-Kod<ik controversy there• .

- -"

"

‘ ;'; _

‘

- .

are great numbers of middle-class Americans suffering from feelingsof

poverlossness. They, who control the consumer market and the voting box,

aro bcwildorcd by their children and by wars fought on television screens.

The middle clac3 3.s fertile ground for organizing and, Alinsky thinks,;• ; #

radicalizing.

• The frusln.tiori in the suburban ghettoes, frequently directed at

thoso even less powerful, - could bo channelled into achieving radical

goals. The secrot, as in any organizing, is that such goals must bo per-l/.f: .

. \ ,. _ ^ - /• \ / * r,.V ' i;* u

.

;* - * *- ’ ' " y

- y “ •’ ’’!

•

4..

r'. r ' '

ceived as paralleling self-interest. A good orgiuiizer could- direct the /-

'

•_ F’

*

process of perception as ^Minsky did in convincing -stockholders.-to use v ,

thdir proxies to influence corporate policy. Or ho couid organize around 'M-'-h,

-.

-,

** **

.-'OH':- tjar fSl.

; ,. . „ , , , . . _

$*&?<& > *?#$;*&. .v*vif 1* ,'•’"' v "•

* ;.*. •'• '/ • '

•; 'V; '’'»* ' 4, . «.; -

: V. - v£ •?. Vl?'

‘

?, :>» y;.t . * ^SSr*: V LJ x •»'* ’ * ." -•

- V' -< •• - •' ' ••»'' •

.^<ari issue such ns tax reformwhero inequities^affect the middle class ••

v*js» r/kj • .

i, \ .

as weir asfnoorer citizens.

There is .no lack of issues;- what .is missing are politicallya?

sophisticated organizers. Alinsky plans on erasing that -lack with, -t• -

• *• • *

.

’'

'- §§ ,

- :

organizers trrJLncd in his new school. The Industrial Areas Foundation

Training Institute is based in' Chicago where the IAF has received finew-V > • »' :

:

V; . >

•'

-V-V:

cial support from the Midas Corporation. (Appendix II). The Institute’ s

purpose is described on the fact sheet as eventually developing mass

power based organizations, which sounds nuch the same ns what Alinsky.

.

* * *

• has been doing. Howevor, during discussions with Alinsky, ho explained• 7 -

'

...

;

'

tho Institute’s orientation difforontly.* - «

:

*

He hypothesized that his traineos might bo "transmitters” d±- v

.‘ 8

gesting, communicating, and acting on inforviiion they receive. Logist-

ically, there night be a cadre of organizers in a given area working on

a cluster of issues maintaining close touch with another cadre whose* *

• i

,cluster/-n6ed:not be similar. V/hat is similar throughout the network

* * *.-

•

.. is the goal of radioalization. A network setup would be particularly .

A " - . v

' suited for tho political organizing ofi an entire city.

On the city level the obvious first step is cooperation between

already existing community organizations in order to pursue certain short-• • .

* *• ,

. . »

range goals. Generally the structure and vision of tho organizations will

..y have to be radically altered to permit such joint efforts. One of Alin- r~l

,

sky’s plans. for tho Institute is to send traineos back into Back of tho:

•' '

- V , ; - , v v

•* Yards to organizo against the organization he set up. If such reorgan-. ; ,

ization proved successful and if orgaMzers'~coUld revitalize TWO’;s

openness to the white community, the groups might cooperate in* some mu®t 1

•• .. .• >- ...

tually* beneficial venture'. One possil^Xity'l^cormnendod^^:

•I?, ; ,v.i"* i •%:

sS

*" is a campaign for improved recreational facilities. TThe prospect of .

' y:

thoir working together is not unrealisiic althou^i, once again, it .

>Vf

*- :

r ’

* ' * '.

* --"'ii Y "Y YY~Y'YY'

‘ depends primarily on the skill of the organizers. -

.‘ •'

When ono moves beyor.d the city and loca^ issues, the idea of in- •

« • '

. dependent national organizing seems impossible. The Depression demonstrated- • %

.""" ''

'

{i

the feasibility of federally controlled planning, and a massive war ef- ,

fort convinced us of '’its necessity. Now we are no longer so convinced..

Cries for decentralization* 1 are attacking the roots of the managerial

garrison state. They are not easily, ignored nor. easily interpreted. Is

,it decentralization" in Ocean Hil1-Brownsvillo but "unconstitutionalism" *

in Little Rock? Decentralization and democracy .are not synonymous as

those who uso the words Interchangeably would have us believe. There are

still too many inequalities in our system for political scientists or

demonstrating students to adopt the "doing one*s own tiling" theory of

participatlon.

*’

Alinsky, evor consistent in his inconsistency, recently expanded

his radical commitment to the eradication of powerless poverty and the

injection of meaning into affluenco. 81s new aspect, national planning, de-

rives from the necessity of entrusting social change to institutions,

specifically the United States Government. Allnslcy’s trust in the "people"

must bo distinguished from, his distrust of the status quo and the people

who make up that mysterious condition. There are certain structures, .

institutions, the' Rost Offico for one, that must be usod. Alinsky recog-

nizes bhe irapo ssibility of achieving social chan ge at this time thro tigh

the incremental means of power/conflict organizing. -His'suppleihentaty- :i

.

plans call for federally-financed work projects on the order of the TVA. * .

- '

-.V?% ", U; v

.»,'iw'^w A14Jns!cr# when asked by Daniel P. Moynihan to work with the new -

" ‘

•. ,

’ - .......

....

'- •

.

'

'

j."

; oi

Nixon administration, grandiosely offered Moynihah his plans, for solving

*^-k,

?• ";

; 1 •«(..h»

' V '•«\ * -S-

- - •

•. r .

• .,• . *-v. 'V ** ^*

- the urban-crisis, the destruction of- the environment^ and the dissatis- • >

. \';•:{:•

**-j

:

! ~.!

~ ~~ *——T~^'~77 T*

>.,. , ,

,

faction of ,the citizenry. He urged the establishment of work projects

• . - •"

• ‘v- — rJ--/: V"

'

in the Southwest to bring water to th&t area, in the Middle West to save .

'

-'

-* *.

_ . ..

«’ ’ “*

•

t

'

: .

“:

-

*

the .Great Lakes, in the Mississippi Valley to prevent flooding and in, f

^

any other part of the country where men and money are heeded to counter-'-t

*

act modernity’s assault on the land. He never heard from the White House10

’ again,.

* _,

*»

''

*

Alinsky’s proposals carry obvious spin-off effects. The neod for..

.

workers could be filled from among the un-^and under-omployod in the. , .

4

-* „;m i|

.-•••

cities. The model integrated communities construotod to house the wor*^/Vvv • •

kers would be self-governing. The projects, administered' by buxvsuorats

and staffed by credontialed experts, would provide attractive recompense

and job satisfaction to lure people away from- the ir<;galopoli

.

The TVA-liko proposals, reminiscent of Sehator Eugeni' McCarthy’s

I96S Frosidchtirl campaign^ stand about moving people out of the ghetto os,

have little chnnco of evor being legislated. Although they would not.

^bo considered too radical in many more centralized welfaro states, tthoy

^‘ are "radical" Triton. the current American political system, Societal com—

’ •* "A-.

1

-

"

parisons raise again questions about the meaning of "radical" and even

"revolutionary" witliin a mass production/consumption state, particularly

" the United 'States. Must definitions perhaps bo as fluid as the actions* •;•

' '

*. •;

,

•**• •' ’ * : 1

-*

.

''•

' r *;\v;:

,-V-, ';

'

- ••

._

.

~ T 1

< •* l :

V.

‘‘ they purport to describe?

-

k

;

‘_

••

V&V v' :

" •'*'V.'-"

V,

*- : ’

.. . '

'

^ Alinsky vroulu answer affirmatively. In spite of his being foatured i

- V v/' ^

If the ideals Alinsky espouses were actualized, the result would '•

bo social revolution. Ironically, this. is not a disjunctive

projection if considered in the tradition of Western democratic

theory. In the first chapter* it was pointed out^h^t Alinsky

is regarded by many as tho proponent of a dangerous/ socio/politicaL

.

philosophy. As such, ho has-been 'feared: 1

- Just as Eugene

Debs or Walt Whitman or Martin Luther King has been feared,«

*

because each embracod the most radical of political faiths —« .

democracy. . ...

I

Appendices:

I, VISTA cartoon *

U. IAF Training Institute fact sheet and application..

- *•. .-;->-,v-:^\- :-5?*rs-

^••• • ; .:-;.*•• .'

:

•

.'_•<: ~- '-... - ;'. •'. v .» -- * - ;. ; i:• *&*»* •^•.v— . .-

,

:...' .-•;. v.'.-r»v-v:; ; .:v^*y^7.vv>‘---. v«;;.jSjn -^Av.

- %.,•*>'*. £' 11mt(!'?:' ' r.\>Jit±±K :’.f’.

%k* >«rr/; •- */%

. 1 !*tu> .f •}. < * /

3.ViUMB^w^v -•

I.

’Jjix'i•.•••>

'A" .».&*£’

ifril

ON A SMALL COLLEGE CAMPUSWE SEE A CLEAN, WELL GROOMED

SUDDENLY HE SENSES...

"I

0£trs

JUMPIN6 BEHIND A NEARBYSOCIAL OBSTACLE,.

y&'A*

mm\W

jmAwr/- /l

war r

&UiW '

/V

SUDDENLY HIS SENSES WARN HIM'.

HE ISAPPROACHIN&ATARGETARBU

lm§M?

teiisfe

gT®8^

WAY TO GO, KID, .

YUH JUST DECK'D ALINSKY !

<•*#*££*> *#'S^** i. fr.Kfil- */*e*»f* Iff

*. • >vrr*,- vjiJtV, I LJ

rfn -'.1

v.;.; vf. ..

' orrtents. j; -,;v

,. .

GEORGELN. SHUSTERMtflOfKT

INDUSTRIAL AREAS FOUNDATI* " EIGHT SOUTH MICHIGAN AVENUE

-- TELEPHONE 238.1931'

T ' CHICAGO. ILL. 60603 .

^—October 25. 1968.

*.

EXECUTIVE DIBCt

.SAUL D^-ALU/ v •

RALPH HELSTEIN-.fCCBCTABr.TBCAEintEtS

Miss Hillary Rodhamv 310 Davis HallWellesley College --

Wellesley, Massachusetts ’ 02181

Dear Miss Rodham:

‘ The Industrial Areas Foundation has announced the establishment of the Training Institute to be based in Chicago, Illinois.

The reason for the Institute is the appalling dearth of persons'

, who know how to organize in and for a free and open society.

Lacking these trained competent political literates the entire field.

of citizen organization is one-tenth fact and nine-tenths wishful

thinking.v <

Today there is no lack of money for organization but what is

undeniably clear is the major obstacle of the absence of trained

, sophisticated personnel who have highly developed organizational

skills and talents for the purpose of building rpass -based organiza-

tions.

Keeping in mind that three-fourths of America is middle class,

a new and long overdue emphasis of the Institute will be placed onthe development of organizers for middle class society. Organ-izers will be trained for black and Mexican American ghetto workas well.as for poor white sections.

The, attached fact sheet and preliminary application answers '.;

most of your questions.. Additional questions should be communicatedin writing and will receive a response.

encL. BOARD OF TRUSTEES

SAUL D. ALINSKY. Chicago, STRINGFELLOW BARR. Vbinceton. new jersey, DR.LE6NA BAUMGARTNER, Xtw yobcity, STIMSON; BULLITT, •cattle. wabhinotohV ROBERT W. CRAIG. a«bcn, colobado, RALPH >IELSTEIN.|ch«ca<»cCHARLES MERRILL, boston, ma*«achusetts, SENIEL OSTROW. losanoeles, DAVID.RAMAGE, JR.; i«w‘roiiK cm

e&rmzt&Mti mwmv* MISS' MAWAN E. WRIGHT. JACKSON. * »

1.

WHAT: The I. A, F. Training Institute is established for the develr?! *

citizens which is the fundamental essential dynamic for a*

free and open society. This will be done principally

according. to the practices, techniques and concepts asdev^oped by the Industrial Areas Foundation for the past

twenty-five years which have proven so effective in actual

operation.

2.

WHERE AND WHEN: - The Institute's home base will be in Chicago,

Illinois and will receive trainees in February, 1969.

3. HOW LONG: The training period will cover fifteen monthsand will be full time for all trainees.

4. WHO:n

Trainees will cover the spectrum of American life. Organ-,izers will be trained for work with all minority groups:blacks, Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans,^Indians andlow income whites. Organizers will also be trained for

similar work in middle class communities.V

5. WHAT IS THE COST? Tuition for the fifteen -month period is $15, 000.

This tuition cost will be mainly assumed by sponsoring organ-/. izations of different interested groups. There will be some

.

selected fellowships and special assistance in certain cases.

Living expenses will run between $5, OOjXto $6, 500 a year andwill be borne by the sponsor or trainee.

5. REQUIREMENTS: (a) A commitment to a free and open society;

(b) Prior experience in the &eld of organizing; (c) Approvalafter screening by Institute representatives in terms of per-sonality criteria essential to the .development of an organizer.This approval will be for admission for the first ninety daysafter which students will be advised whether or not they canbecome professional organizers. Our experience has indicated

- ’ that the odds may be as high as 50% washout.

7. HOW MANY: 'Each fifteen-month period will be restricted .

..

’ to forty trainees~with Replacement provisions. ' '

; A*

3.

WHAT IS THE TRAINING? The training will. emphasize,' primarily', the

understanding by students of various universalities and

-

.common denominators of organizational principles to insure

' their not becoming merely specialists of certain-types of ..

community organizations either ethofe, racial or ‘‘comamtfc

The trained organizer coming out of the Institute will ' *

‘ be~competent and prepared to engage in effective Or-“

ganization in almost any sector of society. This will

W derr^ndjluidity, imagination, flexibility in the meetingM .changing conditions^ and circumstances where the .

'• latter willbe dealt with as a matter of course. A central

'

"• fault of conventional training is the^stiflirig of these’

" qualities by the strait jacket of "rigid formulas" and "staticpatterns.

"

They will be so trained as to develop a passionate curiositywhich is the driving dynamism in continuing to learn. If

rhere will be any one symbol of the basic theme of the

Training Institute it will be the question mark. The goodorganizer is ever-growing, ever- learning, ever-questioning .

and ever-curious so that even in a moment of success hhs

feeling of triumph is almost equaled by his feeling of curiosity- as to why he succeeded, and conversely - with defeat his~

feeling of dejection ia almost equaled by his curiosity as to• why it failed. The development of this passionate questioning,

which in the last analysis should be the base for all true

education, is a major, objective of the Training Institute.

9. WHO. WILL TEACH? Saul D. Alinsky and staff of professional

organizers will teach and supervise. Guest faculty rangingfrom philosophers to economists to activistsf in the fields of .

labor, civil rights, politics, business, religion and educa-tion' will be connected with the Institute

\‘

10.. WHAT WILL BE THE TEACHING METHOD? The teaching methodswill include among others a, basic socratic approach; a combin-

. ation of seminars, personal conferences,' working in various

communities and actual organizing situations, ranging from,the initial organizational action through" all of the various ~ ~

^ stages including the problems accompanying successful organ-izations. The laws of change and universalities will be

: studied not only in terms of immediate.pragmatism but also..

philosophically, historically, and through present events.

The mechanics of mass organization, organizing theory, the

art of politics, tactic and strategy, means and ends, conflict

and, leadership will be part of the curriculum. The organizing .

- .- situation' will provide the grist for reflection, review and^self- fknowledge. Trainees will. learn from their experience but

"experience" is the digesting of action and events; otherwise sp-

it is undigested waste.,

v ;v: - k-£y>:

-

l*%'*$&*

. j ; ..{

WHAT ARE THE STEPS?i ,

";

(a) Fill out the enclosed preliminary application;

(b) I. A. F. will notify you for an interview or. rejection;

(c) A screening and selection process; >.‘_-

(d) TuitiOn arrangements;^ (e) Admission to Training Institute; - .

.(f) Begin training in early 1969.,

12. WHERE WILL YOU* LIVE? That is your business.

Guidance assistance in housing..will be provided by the: Institute staff.

13. WILL YOU HAVE FREE TIME? Yes, about one day a week.. - . There will be one or more break periods during training \

lasting.up to a week or ten days. These periods are un- ‘

•

- ^specified as of now.

' 14." WHAT ABOUT YOUR FAMILY? That is your business just

as it will be when you are organizing. You may as well

learn how the lesson that you will experience after you' are a trained organizer, namely, what we, the community

.

' and the general public are concerned with is your contri-

bution in organization. Your family life is your own per-sonal business. .

. .

15. WILL YOU GET A FORMAL DEGREE? No. . You ^iU be‘

‘

,certified as having completed the special trainihg^programi

16. WHO ARE LIKELY SPONSORS? Church'groups, communityand citizen groups, civil rights groups, . individuals of

means, labor unions, foundations and other institutions.' ;

17..WHAT DO I DO IF I HAVE ONLY PARTIAL TUITION OR NONE

.

AT ALL? If you are the right person there are some •.

free scholarships or partial scholarships. Fill out

the application and you will get special consideration':^

for a scholarship if you qualify.

‘'

' Preliminary Application - t' ^ ; 7

’

t•*

*,

* ’ *

INDUSTRIAL AREAS FOUNDATION TRAINING INSTITUTE

Name

Marital Status Dependents

Address

Phone - Area Code *•• #

(Please prijit or type - use as many pages as you need)

X; What have you attempted to organize? Where? When? With what success

2. What- kind of people are you interested in organizing? Why?

3. Exactly what do you do now? For whom? How long? Why?

4. . What is your formal educational bafckground?. * * :

5. What do you think are your greatest weaknesses? Your greatest strengths?

V

6. List three, recommendations who will be most familiar with .you.

Give their full names, addresses and phone numbers, .

7. Do you have anyone or a'ny institution willing to sponsor your training?

If so, who?

8. Why do you desire to become a professional organizer? .

9. Assuming you are accepted and traine^, what do you plan to do immediatelyupon completion of training?

-10.—What do you want out of life? ,

11. We would be interested in any general comments you care to make on~

anything including the above questions. '

.

* y'

••

•

-,

•

.. y.y/;. -

• '

• PRIMARY SOURCES•

* .

*

Personal Interviews

f

Minsky, Saul -Du. Mr. Minsky and I net twice d^Ang October in Boston’ and .

* during January nt Wellesley* Both tines he was generous with ideas

. and interest. His offer of a place in the new Institute was tempting• but after spending- a- year trying to make sense out of his incon-sistency, I neod three years of legal rigor.

. ...-• .... •

Haffner, John. Reporter on the Back of tho Yards Journal who represents• "the views of his neighbors regarding tho community* s future in

conservatively chauvinistic terms. January, 1969, in Chicago.^ .

Hoffman, Nicholas von. One of the best of Minsky’s organizers and. now asuperb writer for-

tho Washington Post * Talked with him by telephohein Washington in October. Ho was both helpful and provocative. \

Ryan, Phyllis. Social Worker on tho staff of .the Back of the. Yards Neigh-borhood Council who. left soon after I intorviewod hor in January,1969. Her honesty about conditions in the aroa as well as herob-vious distress over them contributed greatly to my understandingof the situation.

Shimony, Annemarie. Frofessor in the Department of Sociology at WellesleyCollege. Mrs. Shimony criticized Alinsky* s met.hod, during our corw

: versation in March, 1969, '•helping mo to focus my own opinions.

Books and S^eechos

Alinsky, Saul D. Reveille for Radicals ! Chicago: University of ChicagoPress j~ 19-V6.

——•--«** "Citioon Participation and Community Organization in Planning andUrban Rone; --.l ,

'* pronontod before Tho Clvloago Chapter of the NationalAssociation of Housing and Redevelopment Officials. Chicago, Illinois:Industrial Ar.cas Foundation, January, 1962.

—— "From Citizen Apathy to Participation," prosentod at the SixthAnnual Fall ' Conforonco

,Association of Community* Councils of Chicago.

Chicago, Illinois: Industrial- Areas Foundation, October, 1957*

—— ?"0f Means and Ends," Union Seminary Quartorl?/ Review . •' (January. -

r.A.A 1967), .pp. 107-138. ,

'

———— * "You C.in*t See ‘tho_ Stars ' Through the Stripes," presented before' ,,

the Chamber of Commerco of the United ;Statos. Chicago, Illinois :'

Industrial Areas Foundation, March, I968.

1—-

—— . "Thc-X.A»F.—Why Is It Controversial?" Church in Metropolis .

I * (Summer, 1?65), pp. 13-15* '•

* * • . .

"Tho \I'V on Povftrty-i-Political Porno rrrat>hy^ 11 Fovorty; Power -ndPolitics, ed. Chaim I. VZaxuan, pp. 171-179. Not York: -Grosset &

s . -^ctfilap,1963

•

"A Professional Radical Moves In On Rochcstcr. VHnmor* s , July, 19&5, • pp.-~52~5*V- t ... " _ .

"The Professional Radical," Horner*

5

, June. 1965, PP* 37-43*

SECONDARY SOURCES

. Books .‘

mrnmmmmtmmmm k

Carter., Barbara. "..Sargent Shrivnr and tlvo Role of the Poor." .Poverty :

Power and Politics , cd. Chaim I. Vaxman, pp. 207-217* Now York:Grosset & Dunlap, 1963 . -

,

• , ..... *

",•

. #

Cosor, Lewis. The Functions of Social Conflict . Ney York: The Froe Press, 19 5^

,, ; t •

'£" a >’

Derry, Jolin W. The Radical Tradition . London: MacMillan, 1967*

Fisher, Roger. "Fractionating Conflict," International Conflict and Be-havioral Science , cd. Roger Fisher, pp. 91-110. Not York: BasicBooks, Inc., 19£>4 .

.

GELazor, Nathan. "The Grand Design of the Poverty Program," Poverty: Powerand Politics , ed. Chaim I. Waxman, pp* 231-293* New York: Grosset &Dunlap, 1968

.

Haggstron, Warren C. "The Power of tho Poor," Poverty; Power and Politics ,. „

ed. Chaim I. Wnnman, pp. 113-136. New York : Grosset & Dunlap 1965*

Horowitz, Irving Louis. "Consensus, Conflict,- and Co-oporation*" System *

Change, and Conflict * ed. N.J. Dcmprath III and Richard A. Peterson,pp.2t>5-261* Ih.-v York: The Free Press, 1967.

^ Kopkind, Andrew. “By or For tho Poor?" PovortyY Power and Politics , ed.Chaim I. VLuonnn, pp* 225-229. Now York; Grosset & Dunlap, l c}68.

Lipset, Soymour Martin. Political Han. Garden City, Not York: Doubledayand Company, Inc, 1959*

.Miller, S.M^'Poverty, Race, and Politics," Poverty; Power and Politics ,

. . . \ ed. Chaim I, VJaxman, pp. 137-159* New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1968. >

Moynihan, Daniel P. Maximum Feasible Hlstmdorstartdin rr. New York: The Free' / 'Press, 1969. - I- "V. j. ;

Raab, Earl. Tr/hat War end Which Poverty?" PovortfTPower and Politics , ed.

Chaim I. Waxman,- pp. - 229-243. New York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1968,

<•.

• ::

.

""‘

.' _ ‘ * >'

,

Sllberman , „Charles E. Crlsig in Black and White Nov York i . RapdoBiBouse ,

:r^s:\;:

ffl964. ‘'-v'T-.;.. HT’"~ -V ' T ’

•*— , "ThS Mixed-up VJar on Poverty t,r Poverty: Power and Politics t ed.

Chaim-I.. Waxnan, pp. 81-iOl. New York: Grossot & Dunlap f 1968, •.

-~

Sinmel, Georg. Conflict and the Web- of Intergroup Affiliations *; New YorkiV -

'—THe~Free Press of Glencoe, .Inc, , 1955* J'

Periodicals

’’Agitator Zeroes in on the Suburbanites,” Business Week ,- February 0, 1969,

pp. 44-46.

Anderson,- Patrick. "Making Trouble is Alinsky's Business,” The New YorkTirnos Magazine , October 9» 1966V PP* 28-31 , 82-104.

_ - **•

Astor, Gerald. "The ’Apostle’ and the ’Fool’,” Look , (June 25# 1968V, PP* '3l"3^*

Boulding, Kenneth E. "Tho City As an Element in the International System#”. Daedulun , (Fall, 1968), pp. 1111-1124. .

.

•*

Dodson, rPan.. VThe 1 Church, POWER, andvSaul Alinsky',” Religion in Life r**

(Spring, 1967), pp. 9^15*

Eagan, John J. Very Rev. Msgr, "The Archdiocese Responds," Church inMetropolis , (Summor, 1965)# PP» 1,6.

« - 4 .»

!

"McClellan and the Informers: Bigotry’s Bedfellows," The Christian Century ,

(July 10, 1968), pp, 887-088. ^ ” ~* *

1 N, -^

' - •

Nenuez, D. Barry, "Stabilizing Neighborhoods in Racial Tension,”

:

Church in

,Metropolis . (Summer, I965 ), pp. 29-31.

1

’’Plato. on the' Barricados," The Economist, (May ,13-19,.,1967) pp. 14.

Reissraan, Frank. "Tho Myth of Saul Alinsky,” Dissent , (July-Jlugust, 1967)#pp. H69-479.

. I. .

•

Ridgeway, James.. "Attack on Kodak,” The New Republic , (January 21, 1967)#pp. 11-13 .

.Rose, Stephen C, "Saul Alinsky and His Critics ,’’ Christianity and Crisis ,

(July 20,^964), pp. 143-152. . -

. ...--— . "Power Play in the City#" -Crossroads , (January-March, I967), PP* 8-12..

Sfcriford, David. "South Side Story," The^Rew Republic , (July 6 , 1968 ) , pp. 13-14

.

-*

; V1 ’

- - . *

]'

, \s

"*?

Sherrard, .Thomas D. and -Richard C. Murray, "The Church and Neighborhood’.Community Organization, ”• Social Work , v (July, 1965) f'PP. 3-14. • XiVC ‘

v

1590-1591.tJKieljsl OUUrtBi-lf l WUM Z(j| ii)oo;|.pp» 5* rm > •-. - .* ’ W K"

Whit© | Herbert D. , Donald R.'Sternle, Ronald Stone. "Discussion* Saul1 AlinsV j' andU-the Ethics ef Social Change,". Union Seminary Quarterly Review ,

(January, 19(57)* pp.- 125-138. •.. :

Newspapers

Back ef the Yards Journal . Randomly selected issues from 1959 through 1968.» * • ***

’ ’ *V

'' '

Beckman, Aldo. "I Didn’t Coach Gang Crime, Rev. Fry Says," Chicago Tribune ,

June 25 »• 1968, p. 1..

. "Rev. Fry Gave Gang Status, Probers Told," Chicago Tribune , July.

2, 1968, p.,1.

Bruckner, D.J.R. "Alinsky Rethinks Idea of Community," Washington Post ',

February 20, 1969* pp. Gl , 11. ]

.*

Cofiold, Ernestine. "A Blueprint to Secure ConniunityriS Future," Chicago - -

Defender , December 3* 1962, p. 9»• v

.

.——— . "A Community Indictment of Our Segregated Schools," Chicago DefenderNovember 28, 1962, p. 9*

-r "A Community Mobilizes Versus Absentee Landlords," Chicago Defender,

November 26, 1962, p. 9» : .

— . "Community Insists on Right to Deterraino’^Own Destiny," Chicago De-

fender , November 25, 1962,. p. 28.

... V

«, "’Death Watch’ Against School Segregation," Chicago Defender ,

November 27 »- 1962, p. 9».***

— . "Found* A General to Lead a Slum Amy," Chicage Defender , November

20, 1962, p. 9.

— . "How University of Chicago was Stopped By A Fighting Community,"Chicago Defender , November 21, 1962, p. 9»

— . "Ministers vs. Evils of Urban Renewal," Chicago Defender / November-19rl962 r p. 9. •

r.

; ; .

— . "Political Power Shown By Mass Bus Ride to City Hall," ChicagoDefender, November 30, 1962, p. 9.'

"Square Deal Campaign .Cracks Down oh Cheating Merchants," ChicagoDefender , November 29, l96^,^p. 11.

-88-

• * IT(

-* —r*+\ - - - r*—^

’

-**

• '

- t

% .

' ' :',

* ‘ *

> »•; , -t -,

'• *« -V .'<•>«< ,s»*'

• .#•>»;*•» '•I*1. » *ov» !•**. j.g’ ** « <*«'» #*•*. ‘

V ,' : .'

;*: ^

. » ' v* „ .

'•

-f;-•

X ~

'

.Edmonds, Richard R. "Gardner Urges U.S. Revive 'Participation," The Harvard; Crimson (Cambridge, Massachusetts)

, March 27, 1968, pp. 1,8,

Jansoh, Donald. "Alinsky To Train White Militants," New York Times , August-

' J^V'1968, p. 27. _ *. .

. Jones, William. "T.W.O. Chief Assails D.C. Testimony.". Chicago Tribune ,”Juno 22, I968,

tp. 4. /

,'

f ;

Koziol, Ronald. "Gang Battles Laid to Quest for U.S. Funds," Chicago TribdrJuly 2, 1968, p. 5 . • • .

"OEO Rejocts Gang Charges-," Chicago Tribune , Juno 24, 1968, p. 8,.*’

"Sociologist Calls Alinsky Failure," New York Tines , June 4, 1967# p. Gl.

"Untired Radical," New York Times , December 22, 1965# P» 15* •

Others --

'

National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, Report of the Commission,— Report of the National -Advisory Commisslcn on Civil Disorders ,

Now York : Bantam Books , 1^68 .

~ ” ~

National Advisory Council on Economic Opportunity, Report of the Council,Focus on Community Action , march, 1968,

Offico of Economic Opportunity, VISTA mblicatlon. Cut Out Poverty , 1968.

Zygrruntowicz , Evelyn, "The Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council and ItsHealth and Welfare ^Services." Unpublished Master* s thesis, SocialWork School, Loyola University, 1959#

*

c>

t